12403 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
It's a shame the King's Gambit is avoid at the GM level.
It makes chess so much more exciting.
Wrong King's Gambit is seen from time to time at GM level.
From time to time maybe, but that's also the case for the Parham Attack.
both out the window and in with f4 and c4.
i cant play d4 because of kings indian defense.what is your ideas?
1.d4 is more positional. 1.e4 is more aggresive.
Both openings are good choices.It depends on whether you are an attacking player or a defensive one.
If you look at games of Spassky or Kasparov, you can't say that 1.d4 is not "more aggressive".
They had no problem making trouble on either side of 1.d4.
Yes. The activity or passivity of an opening move has more to do with the person playing it than the move itself.
1.d4 isn't aggreesive from the start. 1.e4 openings can go directly to attack within a very short period of time. 1.d4 openings provide more king safety and thus make attack impossible until at least the middle game.
Attack isn't as immeditate in 1.d4 openings.
A 'boring' player in d4.
e4 or d4 can both be aggressive, it's just one move...
I love it when players claim that 1.e4 has been studied to death in comparison to 1.d4.
Have you studied the QGD or the King's Indian? There is barely anything there that has not already been scanned and studied by someone else.
It's not any less studied than the Ruy Lopez.
8.Qa4+ cannot be a logical move.
It's theory, as much as I love the idea of a 1300 questioning a super GM World Championship challenger.
It doesn't take a 2000+ rated player to realize that checking the king and then having to move the queen to a passive position is a mistake.
Actually, checking with Houdini it agree, so obviously this "theory" can be disregarded as a waste of time.
By the way, this Super GM gave up a pawn for nothing. Not even a lowly 1400+ rated player would make that kind of mistake.
By simply playing 9...Qc7 he has a nice position.
Such a nice position white wins 55% of games in the line on chessgames and loses 21%.
Scottrf, it's much better than giving up a pawn for nothing. 9...Qc7 is the best move in that position.
It can't really be argued.
You were saying Qa4 was the bad move for white...theory and a very successful line.
And that Qc7 would give black a nice position; winning 18% and losing 55% which is obviously a fantastic return.
You are focusing way too much on ratings and statistics. In that position 9...Qc7 saves the pawn. It's the only good move.
You seem to think that GM's are flawless. They are human. Try to remember that.
Dutch championship predictions here
by JMB2010 2 minutes ago
Can Chess.com refute the King's Gambit?
by Game_of_Pawns 3 minutes ago
7/7/2015 - Execution Of The Attack
by chessiv 4 minutes ago
by PHudson 6 minutes ago
Why do Sicilian players hate 2.c3?
by Rumo75 7 minutes ago
Stuff Non-Chess Players Say
by dragonair234 8 minutes ago
Can you really become a class A player by studying tactics?
by Novagames 9 minutes ago
When a coward refuses to resign.......
by colinsaul 10 minutes ago
Drueke Player's Choice
by goodknightmike 15 minutes ago
Best Chess.com members.
by Whip_Kitten 24 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2015 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!