19426 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!
Here is a game I played as black- non-computer correspondence.
Nice game but you realize White did not make the correct moves?
Thanks for bringing the topicback
Of course I realize that mistakes were made. Presumably I made some as well. Nice thing about chess the way I prefer it.
A recent Fraser win:
Dave Taylor beat a FIDE master who tried white's moves in a centaur game. I deviated from Dave's precise line.
This game was played on faith that white was losing! Therefore attack and crowd the king. Midway I missed a forced draw for white. When I asked my opponent about it, he said he was trying to win at that point.
I am pretty sure Dave's analysis involving the Fraser involves Na3.
A long time ago I played in a chess team, but missed a match against a team whose board 1 had just published a deeply theoretic book on a complex opening system for black. Our team board 1 played white straight down the main line upon which the book depended and which the author assessed as being slightly better for black. At the end of the line, white made 1 original move and smiled as black realized he was dead lost, and his book was busted. The author lost it and leapt across the board, pieces flying, and the players had to be physically separated.
BTW I like centaur chess, even when limited to a weak engine. I rarely follow the engines on every move for many reasons, but especially when they do not understand ideas that extend beyond their anaysis tree. I like Hiarcs, because when I show it a relevant variation beyond its depth, it can remember it and factor it into its analysis. It is prone to missing long term positional intermezzos.
lenslens1 That is interesting. What was the book?
I notice some older books on the Ponziani have many pages on a line which is completely busted. Here is the line:
The Ponziani Power group recently won a game that I think improves on a suggestion from Play the Ponziani
Get stuck when all pieces are developed/
by JackOfAllHobbies a few minutes ago
For sale - Paul Morphy's chess set
by plutonia a few minutes ago
who is better at chess smeagol from lord of the rings or dobbie from harry poter
by g-man15 3 minutes ago
Chess should be free as the air we breath
by plutonia 4 minutes ago
Chessbazaar's Dubrovnik 4" crimson problem?
by FrankHelwig 4 minutes ago
by Litwitlou 5 minutes ago
by g-man15 6 minutes ago
Is Chess a Game or War? ? ?
by imkan125 9 minutes ago
If Fischer would played Karpov for the World Champion, who would win?
by millionairesdaughter 10 minutes ago
New Chess Book Review blog
by schack_2 13 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!