i know this is off topic but to share my joy I just beat a 2023 ^_^

i actually wanted him to play the fried liver because of the ulvestad variation. do you know it gavinator?

well the fried liver is easy for black to equalize in

There's been a misunderstanding. What I'm saying is that you guys, are beginners, not compared with titled players, but even compared to experienced amateurs. I'm also a beginner yet better rated than you..

At your level, you need to work on tactics and basic endgames. You've worked a lot on tactics? Doesn't show in your ratings. With the number of games you guys have played here, your ratings are relevant, at least in the chess.com pool. If you were good enough to stop worrying about tactics, you'd be better rated than I am. I still win and lose beause of tactics 9 times out of 10, against 1500/1600 players.

More important, seeing some of your games like the one posted in the Help with the dragon thread, you guys may think you understand an opening, but once again, playing thematic moves or coming up with a plan is useless when you blunder so much. In the game I mention, you guys hanged pieces and missed basic tactics.

Yeah I know, one was multi tasking and the other one was not on his best day. Nice excuses, proably easier than admitting you're still very weak at tactics.

Imbalances? Positional chess is useless as long as you miss basic tactics and hang pieces. And anyway, Silman is way above your head at your rating. Pick up a copy of Heisman's Elements of positional evaluation, more acessible and focused on principles rather than "imbalances"...

Anyway, this is useless, you guys think that you're much better than you actually are and won't be convinced otherwise. Maybe some more months stagnating at the same rating will open your eyes...

Hey don't push buttons, i have already admited that I still need practice and have admited that the game was pretty useless, my not being on a good day was just a thing of me having a crap day and just not really paying much attention to detail. but I do agree that we need to study tactics and endgames. but I don't want to leave anything behind. Plus a flawed plan is better than no plan

BTW Gavinator, Na5 is the mainline, it attacks the bishop on c4 giving black a very nice game later, this is why you dont see the fried liver. and just because a move hangs a pawn doesn't mean it is bad. there may be a reason for hangging the pawn

I just learned the lines I know so I can get to a playable middle game, not so that I would be more booked up than anyone, also Na5 was the extent of my knowledge. proving that I don't go 15/20 moves deep.

I see that does make sence, but doesn't black have an easier time developing, plus I would play 7. Nxc6 for the sake of development and so I can castle to safety latter and unpin the knight

Sure he is.  And after 8.Be2 h6 9.Nf3 e4 10.Ne5 Bd6 11.d4 exd 12.Nxd Qc7 13.h3 0-0, he's still up a pawn, and is still in the mainline.  But black has five pieces developed to white's two, and a plus score at the GM level.

I am tired of arguing against the parham and the fried liver, I want to go against it the real way, play a game vs me. also I want to prove that the KG isn't refuted just because you give up a pawn and open your kingside. it has merrit. I will play the King's Gambit vs. anyone

...and after 8.BxN+ bxB, blacks queenside pawns are not looking too good.