Bringing the Queen out early should be Punished!

Jump to forum:
20th May 2009, 02:12pm
#41
by AfafBouardi
Rabat Morocco
Member Since: Jan 2009
Member Points: 1148

ohhh snap.  You just don't like openings in which the queen is brought out early!  lol.  Nice work.

20th May 2009, 02:21pm
#42
by reidy125
England United Kingdom
Member Since: Jan 2009
Member Points: 3

I'm a 1300 player and relatively new to the game. Your opponent may have been a 1650 player but I have never seen such inaccuracies.

I have heard somewhere before that bringing out a queen early is not a good strategy, but in this game, I believe your opponent made the right decision on his second move. It was his play after that, that let him down.

20th May 2009, 02:21pm
#43
by aidanmcc
London England
Member Since: Aug 2008
Member Points: 109

Ilikeflags, you were going on about how e4forme hasn't played many games against higher rated players. If this is the case, would that not mean that his level would be lower than 1900 despite the rating, and therefore this game be more impressive?

It seems you were unimpressed as soon as you found out he may have an "untrue" rating.

20th May 2009, 02:22pm
#44
by daozu
Haarlem International
Member Since: Mar 2008
Member Points: 20

Nice game, thanks for posting.

20th May 2009, 02:34pm
#45
by reidy125
England United Kingdom
Member Since: Jan 2009
Member Points: 3

15. Qd1 was shocking (unless anyone can tell me otherwise). He gave his queen away. Didn't he?

20th May 2009, 02:40pm
#46
by ilikeflags
Las Vegas, with Scouser blood United States
Member Since: Apr 2008
Member Points: 1724

thanks for posting this game.  and thanks for pointing out the ratings.  i never would have looked.

20th May 2009, 02:41pm
#47
by ilikeflags
Las Vegas, with Scouser blood United States
Member Since: Apr 2008
Member Points: 1724
aidanmcc wrote:

Ilikeflags, you were going on about how e4forme hasn't played many games against higher rated players. If this is the case, would that not mean that his level would be lower than 1900 despite the rating, and therefore this game be more impressive?

It seems you were unimpressed as soon as you found out he may have an "untrue" rating.


i was unimpressed by the huge rating difference.  i understand why he posted the game now.  i would have handled it differently.  however, i am far from perfect and my way is not the only way.

20th May 2009, 02:53pm
#48
by ROTTNESS
Houston United States
Member Since: Dec 2008
Member Points: 44

I didnt know Peter North played chess..........Peter if that is really you, your my idol lol

20th May 2009, 02:57pm
#49
by AfafBouardi
Rabat Morocco
Member Since: Jan 2009
Member Points: 1148

Who is Peter North?  The picture looks like an overtanned football player with a thick neck.

20th May 2009, 02:58pm
#50
by ROTTNESS
Houston United States
Member Since: Dec 2008
Member Points: 44

dude hes a porn star!!!!!!!!!

20th May 2009, 03:02pm
#51
by drshinnick
Massachusetts United States
Member Since: Oct 2008
Member Points: 76

This thread long ago lost any legitimate connection to the title so with that in mind: 

I'm in ilikeflags'corner on this one.  Ratings are fine but posting a player's name (and I'm not saying e4forme is the only one to do this) is a bit heavy handed I think.  Especially when the point is to highlight the victor's opinion of the defeated's judgement instead of say, an intense and well matched battle.

Just my opinion.

20th May 2009, 03:03pm
#52
by AfafBouardi
Rabat Morocco
Member Since: Jan 2009
Member Points: 1148

Ok.  So you idolize him for his...porn work?  Eh, I don't know if this is a conversation worth having.  

20th May 2009, 03:09pm
#53
by ROTTNESS
Houston United States
Member Since: Dec 2008
Member Points: 44

afaf dont be such a dork, i guarantee you he has a better job than you and me both

20th May 2009, 03:12pm
#54
by AfafBouardi
Rabat Morocco
Member Since: Jan 2009
Member Points: 1148

Between the person who idolizes a porn star and me...I'd be the dork.  hmm.  Alternate reality perhaps.

20th May 2009, 03:16pm
#55
by ROTTNESS
Houston United States
Member Since: Dec 2008
Member Points: 44

wow you chess dudes make me think too much. were not worthy were not worthy

20th May 2009, 03:36pm
#56
by SerbianSoccerStar
Belgrade Serbia
Member Since: May 2009
Member Points: 71
ilikeflags wrote:
aidanmcc wrote:

Ilikeflags, you were going on about how e4forme hasn't played many games against higher rated players. If this is the case, would that not mean that his level would be lower than 1900 despite the rating, and therefore this game be more impressive?

It seems you were unimpressed as soon as you found out he may have an "untrue" rating.


i was unimpressed by the huge rating difference.  i understand why he posted the game now.  i would have handled it differently.  however, i am far from perfect and my way is not the only way.


 I agree with ilikeflags! i was pretty unimpressed with the 300 rating difference but after he posted another game vs an higher opponent i was impressed :D

20th May 2009, 04:00pm
#57
by socket2me
Ft. Collins, Colorado United States
Member Since: Dec 2008
Member Points: 563

I kind of agree with likeflags that a solid 1900 player doesn't need to make cracks against 1500's and below.  On the other hand, the message is mostly true you shouldn;t bring the queen out early, but sometimes you are kind of forced into it.

20th May 2009, 04:00pm
#58
by Politicalmusic
Alabama United States
Member Since: Feb 2009
Member Points: 2450
ilikeflags wrote:

no hostily at all my simple friend.  it's a bitch move to post a game calling your opponent out for misplaying when you're rated 300 point higher than him.  this has nothing to do with me,.,., although your attempt to make it about me is predictable.  it must be fun playing all those 1400s and 1200s. 

i don't believe a person's ability to play chess makes them any more a man...  hahah  just in case you thought i was intimidated.  i would expect if we played that you would out-play me.  you're a 1900 i'm a low 1500.  but it sounds like you revel in this type of challenge.  to each his own.  and to each the ability to comment.


Dude you made me bust out laughing in an inappropriate place!  lol....(but why am I on chess.com here anyhow lol)

20th May 2009, 06:03pm
#59
by aidanmcc
London England
Member Since: Aug 2008
Member Points: 109
socket2me wrote:

I kind of agree with likeflags that a solid 1900 player doesn't need to make cracks against 1500's and below.  On the other hand, the message is mostly true you shouldn;t bring the queen out early, but sometimes you are kind of forced into it.


I agree too that it isn't impressive to beat a player rated 300 points lower. He was merely demonstrating the flaws in bringing your queen out too early. It doesn't matter what rating you are.

20th May 2009, 06:38pm
#60
by stats_man
Washington United States
Member Since: Nov 2008
Member Points: 334

As a 1900 player on this site I am somewhat irritated that my average player when I win is 1589 (the same 300+ point difference).

Part of the problem is that, when I join an open tournament, many times myfirst bracket will be something like this

stats_man 1900

John Doe #1 1213

John Doe #2 1117

John Doe #3 988

John Doe #1 1317

And I easily advance.

Aside from this, there are many players in the 1500-1700 range that I play multiple times just because we have become chess.com friends.

That being said, we should avoid words like "punish" while posting a game with the others user name.

It is quite easy to post a game without your opponents user name or rating, at which point emotive adjectives are just fine.

Part of being a good player is to be a gracious winner which is just as difficult as being a gracious loser.


Add your comment:

Join Chess.com for free to add your comment! Already a member? Then login now to comment.