Give him time <JFQ>!

I like the way he is turning into a solid player. He can work on his attacking skills later on, and take more chances when he has the experience to judge them better.

But maybe you are right, if he starts disrespecting people as well I may have to go launch a campaign against his page. That would be bloody though...

I think my work on the Kramnik page is pretty much done though, the place is a complete nut-house ATM.

I feel sorry for Anand ATM, he clearly has been working hard for this tournament since beating Kramnik and it would be a great way to start his new reign if he won for a third time.

heh...

His game is a dish best served cold.

He will destroy <Drawpalov> in the Match--

I only hope they are playing at least 16 games. Or 12 at the lowest.

I can only imagine what the young Fischer (or even the older one) would have to say about a match that short.

It's interesting you think Anand is over-pressing, you might have a good point there. one thing I can't explain though is why he is going into the more positional lines with Black, he seems happy to enter inferior endgames for some reason.

Oh well, the ways of a World Champion are mysterious indeed. He can do what he likes until the Topalov match, as long as he then proceeds to crush the hideous little toad like somebody should have done a long time ago.

It's interesting to observe that "non chess people" call people who play chess NERDS...while chess lovers like us call "Chess 960 lovers" NERDS...

I took Pickles to the vet yesterday, he has lost half of one of his fangs, no doubt in a vicious fight for territory.

I will stay with the beast today and sooth him as best as possible.

Are heads going to roll on yahoo today?

I was on my way to a great victory yesterday, my opponent had played a Benoni and I was attacking all over his position. Then I hung a whole rook in time trouble, and almost bit my own foot off in frustration. The next time somebody plays a Benoni against me, I'm going to go for blood!!

Who's Pickles?.. Your pet snake??>

HAHAHA

You said "Mr" Pickles....

No, no, the more the better.

I'm trying to break the all-time <most popular personal forum spamming record> of 568 pages.

<Mr. Pickles>-- speedy recovery!! He is still famous for eating that Frog that used to hop around so flagrantly.

He's not so "hoppy" these days, however.

heh...

Hats off to <Mr. Pickles>.

<Trig>- Mr. PIckles *does* in fact have some <squirrel> in her lineage.

That's one of the reason she eats chess pieces, when given the chance.

The <Eastern Phase American Grey Squirrel> subsists mainly upon a diet of chesspieces and lint, in case you didn't know.

<Woody Benoni Rook>

????

I don't understand why you are playing at time controls where it is possible to hang a rook.

Now, you have to consider the source here-- I hung a rook at long time controls during my "comeback" a month ago... so you can't go by what I say really.

But really!!

Blitz/Rapid results aren't "real".

It's fun, but it's nothing to do with actual chess.

Not even when GMs play it against each other.

As <Eyal> put it so well-- remember when <Kamksy> lost that first game because of time trouble?

<Eyal>: "Kamsky did not have the time left on his clock to play <serious chess>"...

Unfortunately, of course, <Drawpalov> had plenty of time on his clock and gave the <Beaver-pelted American> a good thrashing with some "serious chess" all right.

All the same, I'm on your side.

I'm just frankly a little envious that you are able- if you wanted- to go to a real chess club and play real chess at real time controls against real people, because I can't.

And that's all I really want to do.

Really.

I've never really been happy since I stopped playing OTB human chess at real time controls.

My last really happy memory is my last night at my Chess Club in Canada.

That said, <Yahoo> report-

I dusted off my old <Alexander_Belyavsky> ID name cuz it has a big rating number and I wanted a tough game today.

But the guy played <Scandinavian> to my <1.e4> and WHEN WILL SOMEONE PLAY A <Ruy>????

I"ve been overplaying the white pieces with <1.e4> with the express goal of practising the <Ruy> and so far only that one game.

Anyhoo I normally despise playing against the <Scandinavian> because if the guy's any good you really have to be careful.

Both <Josh Waitzkin> and <Roman Dzshindshalvilislailivlilioiaoijllli> have used the <Black Scandinavian> to scalp more than a few people caught napping by this opening--

Just because <Bobby> "laughed" at this defence- and he did-- doesn't mean it's unsound.

Ok- remember at my level there really is no established opening at all that is unsound.

None.

That's because I'm not an expert.

But I frequently pretend I'm an expert when I'm playing.

Heh-- the guy tried to whup me with some quick coffee house tactics and I gave him his head on a plate.

Look at this horse manure-- <White> - Me- to move and crush--

click for larger view

Heh-- <Nxg6> is fine here- I would have played that in Blitz for sure- Leaves me down a pawn but up the exchange.

But- I took some calculatin' time here since it was a long time control and it didn't take too long to find

<Qxd4!> In your face buddy!!!

here is post number

<19 million 600 thousand>...

heh...

Only 4 thousand posts till I catch that pesky <Dag Hammarskjold> for number one blabbermouth spot on the list.

He posts as much as I do during the <Big Chess Event Season>, if you can believe it.

Course, he posts about chess usually.

You are right about the bad time controls I'm playing with, I'm using half an hour each with no increments ATM. I would like longer but I can't risk it right now.

I'm glad you thrashed that guy who played the Scandinavian, they all deserve to be beaten senseless...although looking at your FEN you did go one better and rip his head clean off!

<<White>- to move and crush-->

That's a novel way of putting it, don't see that in many puzzle books.

hahaha

I feel your pain at not being able to get a Ruy, I dislike many of the divergences intensely as well, but that just makes me more motivated to punish the guy playing the rubbish at me.

Although it's true there are no 'unplayable' openings at club level. (hell Karpov lost to 1...a6 so it just shows you can be unpleasantly surprised even at GM level.)

<<Qxd4!> In your face buddy!!!>

Yea!

Looks like you can hit the bar early today.

Well done <JFQ>!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B...

I was just reading about it, truly mind blowing stuff.

After <1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3>

The Queen goes to either <a5> or back to <d6> or even <d8?> if you can believe it- But all three of these variations are quite playable, IMO.

Well they are against me, at any rate.

1.

click for larger view

2.

click for larger view

3.

click for larger view

<Number 3>...heh... even *I* Iike to think I can do well against this one, though I confess I've lost to it before-- INCLUDING IN CORRESPONDENCE!!!

Also, another "proper" continuation is <1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6> Where the idea is to tempt White to defend the pawn with <3.Nc3?> when it is actually better to just play <3.d4>.

click for larger view

However, in the variations where the Queen recaptures the pawn, after <3.Nc3> if the Queen goes anywhere except <a5>, <d6>, or <d8> I call these COFFEE HOUSE variations--

And you see these variations on <yahoo> right up past the 1600 mark- believe it or not.

Reason being, there are some tricks and traps at Black's disposal if White plays too hastily, gobbling up tempi and developing by chasing the Queen all over the board.

There's a bunch of variations here where White gets a huge lead in development but drops the <d-pawn>--

But the thing is for White not to panic if the <d-pawn> drops because the lead in development is worth lots more than the pawn.

I actually misplayed the game I just posted there and it was only because he got greedy and eager for the quick kill that I got to shove it back in his face.

If you do a little "move archaeology" from that position, you will discover that with correct play Black had already equalized or better despite my lead in development. Although you know what-- although an Engine will tell you Black was equal or better before he pulled the boner on that FEN I posted-- I betcha the Engine is overvaluing White's loss of the <d-pawn>.

In actual human play, a big lead in development with the Queen as a target will offer plenty of chances to win-- Because after Black nabs the <d-pawn> then it is BLACK who must play very accurately-- because his Queen is exposed and White has a pile of active minor pieces developed.

That said, however, in <post mortem> I found my inaccuracy and I even remembered it from games I've played before.

I check all my games with my Engine so I don't keep repeating the same errors and form bad habits.

I hadn't faced the <Scandinavian> in a long time, and it's been an even longer time since I faced the COFFEE HOUSE variation, so I was a bit rusty.

It brought back some fond memories replaying this one with my engine, however....

I just messed up the move-order slightly.

You see-- the <Scandinavian> can be tricky to handle!! Even the COFFEE HOUSE version....

White players almost never see it, and if Black plays it you <know> they have "something" in mind.

It's not an opening people just choose casually.

heh-- I was still doing <post - mortem> analysis when I last posted...

It's been a while since I analyzed the <Scandinavian> and it brought back some good memories..

Ok I'm going to check out the links you just gave..

OK I just read the articles and you are right the second one is better.

But- in an important sense- IT IS WORSE.

This kind of "almost-scientific" writing is 10 times more dangerous than plain old <ridiculous religious pseud-science>, because it sounds so plausibe from a <bona fide> scientific perspective.

But this slippery kind of rhetoric is just one more attempt to supply some kind-- ANY KIND-- of "actual evidence" to support OBVIOUSLY FALSE AND LUDICROUS <religious truth claims>.

I've nothing against "religion" qua "religiion"--

And I've even less against "religious people", since the cohort of "religious people" includes such a diverse array of "types" that it defies categorizations.

However-- these efforts to reconcile <traditional religious truth claims> with "scientific evidence" just retards the progress of human knowledge.

Case in point-- all those forgeries in <Israel> of "Jesus" names, and the "Lost Temple of Solomon" artifacts, and the "Bible codes" that predicted <JFK's Assaassination>...

That's just hideous bunk. And dangerous.

BBC Horizons did an excellent job of debunking the "Bible prophecy Code" truth claims--

And it wasn't easy either. There were some sophisticated statistical anomolies that had to be accounted for to explain how the Bible could not actually have "predicted" the assassination of <JFK>...

Many, many secular scholars were duped by this for a long time.

Look-- the archaeological find seems stunning, and great--

Why TOTALLY RUIN the science-- meaning the <true mystery and majesty>...

of such a find with

MEALY MOUTHED SLIPPERY INSINUATIONS THAT THE <Garden of Eden> or the "History" in <Genesis>

IS ACTUALLY REAL?????

Because it isn't.

It's ABSOLUTE NONSENSE, in terms of the entire set of <truth claims> made in the <Book of Genesis>.

Leave science to scientists, please-- and religion to religious people.