15942 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!
Uhhh, but OK. In that game Hoi is playing a French Rubinstein being (as white) a full tempo down (pushed the pawn to e4 in two moves instead of one).
He is not worse, of course, but his win has absolutely nothing to do with the opening.
Allow me (and Fritz!) to disagree. And (also) White gets a Q-side majority out of the opening. I have won hundreds of games with this in blitz ... people always thinks its OK to just swap pieces ... and head for the endgame.
Of course, if you had attended Kolty's lectures, (or) bought his books, you would know what I am talking about. (G. Koltanowski was a good player, famous for his blindfold exhibitions.)
Only one way to sort this disagreement out.
Ken Smith & John Hall's book on the Colle gives a nice job of explaining how to play for a win out of the supposedly "stale and equal" Colle positions. I feel like it's available for a quarter at every used book store in the universe.
But this is no place for naked Sumo.
Oh, OK then. Please tell me what would you play in that game if Black had played the natural 30...a5 instead of 30...f4.
Offering a draw does not count as a good plan, even if the queen endgame is factly dead equal.
And of course Black didn't have to do massive exchanges in the opening. 11...Qc7 instead is a dream position for every Black Rubinstein or Caro-Kann Karpov variation player.
I am all for one of those (chess) "Death Matches" ... to settle things ...
But, seriously. IM pfren, your suggestions are prolly OK ...
but they miss the point of the whole article!
What opening do YOU teach to a rank beginner?
Please enlighten me ... ... ...
The King's Gambit is easy enough, get the pieces pointing at f7 and then attack
King's Gambit, huh? And you would actually teach this to a bare-bones beginner ... someone who had just learned the moves maybe a few days before?
For someone who is JUST STARTING OUT in chess, I maintain that the Colle is probably the easiest and safest of all openngs to try and learn ...
For a fairly in-depth article ... that's also 100% free ... please go to - http://www.worldchessacademy.com/learningchess02.htm. (Many links - from there.)
I am trying to learn Philadors defence. it kind of easy.
Bro stop with the King's Gambit, it is easy to stop and you throw away a pawn.
As opposed to being easy to stop and throwing away a tempo? Or two? Or a queen?
What do you mean ebenezer drood, idk what you're even talking about?
Why not just teach basic development with the idea of taking the center, instead of teaching systematic and robotic play in the opening (first we set up this structure, and only think thereafter)? While I agree with you in that beginners will get crushed starting out in simple and open positions, it's better than having them only see one type of position and having a very shallow exposure to the basics of chess. At the beginning stages of chess, shouldn't the opening almost be completely ignored other than basic principles, anyway? Endgames, endgames, and more endgames are the best way to build a base for a new chess player - it's crucial to learn how the pieces work together instead of being told where to move them to get safely into the middlegame.
It seems like there are two frequently employed methods of teaching chess these days to beginners - focusing on endgames and understanding how the pieces work with each other and focusing on flashy tactics and mates. One produces a neverending stream of 1400s who play the King's Gambit and spend their whole career trying to get the Bxh7+ sacrifice, the other kills interest for some and creates strong masters out of the rest.
yeah and just because you give away a pawn doesn't mean you don't get something in return, I tend to like the position I get in the KG, and if you would accept my challange (which I would never lower myself to those cheaters) I would show you that you get a dynamic advantage rather than a passive advantage
and How is the KG easy to stop
sure. I accept
and How is the KG easy to stop?
Play against Fritz 13, and you will be stopped cold ... every time.
Sure. If you're playing against a computer. Or a Master. For many non-masters, this is sound.
"FIDE Grand Prix, Round 8 | Hosts: GMs Evgeny Miroshnichenko and Viorel Iordachescu"
Who Ever Invented Chess Made A Mistake
by PerfectConscience 3 minutes ago
5/22/2015 - Surya Ganguly - Emanuel Berg , Gibraltar, 2009
by Nanacc 5 minutes ago
How to fill the gap in my repertoire
by PeskyGnat 5 minutes ago
Double weighted? Triple weighted?
by ifekali 10 minutes ago
The game should let you swear
by ivandh 11 minutes ago
please help me improve my game!
by Mal_Smith 11 minutes ago
how to master chess theory?
by ivandh 19 minutes ago
Should I play 1.d4?
by iplayforsherlock 19 minutes ago
Moving a Pawn Twice in the Opening
by Rumo75 22 minutes ago
Who is the best chess player ever?
by jerryhemeke2076 22 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!