11842 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!
Comparing us to Carlsen is a bit pointless. He'd probably win against most of us if he started without a queen. Openings do matter more with equal players than chess.com members vs super GM's. Have Carlsen play the world's second best and 1. Na3 might not be such a wise decision for him.
really? starting without a queen i highly doubt that he would still win if he did not start with a queen probably a better statement is if he started without a pawn he would still win easily
Notice he said MOST, as 90% of chess players are below class c from what i remember.
true but i still think an extra queen is a huge material advantage one that most players would not blow i know there are many class c players that could blunder and lose but its still very unlikely
If I manage to blow a whole queen in a position otherwise equal (for example the starting position), I would kill the witnesses and leave the country to avoid the shame that would follow. Yes, even against Carlsen or Rybka.
Playing Carlsen with a queen down would be advantage Carlsen, because the only reliable attack I know would be useless (Fool's mate).
Off topic question (and I honestly intend no disrespect): why do so many Americans capitalize the file when giving notation? For example, 1.E4 instead of 1.e4? The capitals here have always looked peculiar to me.
Plus, it leads to odd looking things like 3.BB5 instead of 3.Bb5 and so forth.
Is it a throwback to the old English notation where everything was capitalized? 1.N-KB3 for example?
Horrible isn't it? (E4 replacing e4)
Bobby Fischer always played 1.e4. He called it “Best by test."
Bobby Fischer never said 1. e4 is best by test.
I think he wrote it.
Yep. Of course, that was a nice catchline, but the real meaning is "from what I played I think I prefer the positions that occur after 1.e4".
BTW, during his WC games he used 1.c4 many times and ended up playing positions from transpositions of 1.d4...
Fischer only played 1.c4 7 times, and 6 of those tries were against Spassky. He was still primarily 1.e4 during his WC match with Spassky
Yes, but it is almost 50/50.
21 games in the Spassky-Fischer WC match, out of which Fischer was White 10 times, out of which he didn't show up in one (game 2).
Out of these nine games, he used 1.e4 five times (4, 10, 16, 18, 20) and 1.c4 four times (6, 8, 12, 14).
That's not overwhelmingly 1.e4 as he was in the rest of his career.
Sorry for the thread hijack.
Another thing I've noticed that's somewhat related (in that it's something you'll never see published in anything, anywhere) is when people create their own rules regarding punctuation marks.
Like the people that don't put a space after commas and full stops.Like this.Drives me nuts,but there's not much I can do about it.
Or when they do the opposite ,and put the space before the punctuation but not after it .Like this .How do people learn to do this stuff ?Have they never actually opened a book and read anything and wondered ,"hmm ,everyone else on the planet follows a different convention than me .Maybe I should follow suit ..."
Anyway, that's the sort of stuff I think of when I see 1.E4 NF6. I've spotted enough of it in these forums to last a lifetime, too. And I'd really like to know what's going on in America that seems to create the majority of this stuff.
With technology nowadays there exists ''voice-activated'' text-producing programs for computers.
Not sure how well those function with regard to punctuation etc.?
For impatient posters, who are more concerned with filling up forum-pages with ''their-opinion'' as rapidly as possible, they could actually improve on the incoherent language that their brains + typing-skills currently output??
why is she dumb? I don't think so, since she's 2000rating.
Without saying anything about the OP's mental qualities, that sentence shows you haven't gone to many chess clubs. There are plenty of good chess players that are maybe not 'dumb' but at least, well, I guess 'autist' is the term.
Hm, sorry for my late reply but I've just realized this blog wasn't going to anywhere and thus decided myself I wasn't going to write anything else anymore; since it was senseless. Either way I believe our mood is just fine enough now for at least discussing a little bit or clearing up our doubts and disagreements once and for all.
So, not intending to procrastinate any further and taking into consideration your exceptional reply, the point I want to deal with is, with all due respect: if a person has autism, this doesn't mean/affect necessarily (in) anything when we're refering to chess abilities, autism works in a different area of brain and not necessarily with cognitive processes, ie autism affects social issues and not cognitive ones, as such memorizing, focusing or concentrating - hence, actually it's quite the opposite most part of times, you'll find a large number of autist persons extremely intelligent and capable of solving problems; and not rarely they solve it way better than common people.
Ah, concerning chess clubs, I have already visited 3 and I haven't seen any indication of people having autism in those places. It's common seeing eccentric players instead and as far as I know about Vanessa, she would be considered an eccentric one, respectfully. Perhaps your measure is disproportional on how many chess players there are or then you simply interchanged the terms refered.
Hmmm well they are very Equal but I think e4. then d4 :)
Yeah, from what I've heard: e4 leads us to unclosed positions and d4 to closed positions, not sure if it is a fact though.
Finally I see that d4 is better for me; after studying theories, seeing chessmasters games and practicing a lot of chess on the weekends in my club. It's practically an immutable opening in my current games now. E4 is doubtless a rarity in my games - maybe one or other, but only spanish and italian openings. Also I must confess that If I had encountered this sort of opening before I certainly would have had a better performance in my rating and play, even though my rating seems stagnated (no matter which player I do play it only comes around 15 points each game). Therefore in case someone is finding problems or difficulties to improve I would suggest trying to take risk of d4.
Either way, Capablanca and other classical chess players do live up in a d4 and makes it seem much simpler if there's anyone here still in doubt about using or not d4.
Ultimately, it will depend on the player's profile and your peculiarities, being e4 or d4, it does not matter substantially providing the fact you play rightly and decently well.
4/26/2015 - Mate in 2
by keb2012 2 minutes ago
Bobby Fischer or Magnus Carlsen
by power_2_the_people 3 minutes ago
What do you say one move from mating your opponent!
by batgirl 3 minutes ago
Kasparov v. Short
by X_PLAYER_J_X 5 minutes ago
Note to self...
by mcchu3888 6 minutes ago
8/3/2014 - Mate in 2
by Krenzinator 6 minutes ago
How easy is to play d4
by clarapca 6 minutes ago
by Onarres24 7 minutes ago
Stevie Stewart from Lexington, TX
by johns2mc 10 minutes ago
by gssleader 12 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!