A Mélange: Why the Italian and other personal updates...
This is an ambitious blog but I hope it will provide me amusement when I read it a year from now.
1. Why the Italian? A fellow player asked why I'd chosen the Italian. I'd stubbornly tried the Ruy Lopez for a year until falling to exhaustion. It never yielded much understanding or tactical development as far as I could tell.
I find the Italian Game straight up. It's sensible and logical to a beginner chess mind and the variations and follies are super duper easy to memorize. While it does show a lot of advantage for Black, I suspect otb or in live chess, it won't be so. Not at my humble playing level.
- Also White has the power to do a lot of the steering.
2. My current agrestic setting is suited well to learning chess.
3. I have a friend who is a bit of a nemesis. He's a perfect peach. Doesn't play chess so often but when we play he takes special pains to win. He tends to win nine out of ten games. We're due for a series of rematches in June. Dignity is on the line.
4. Sometimes I click on the starting square and then on the destination square to move a piece. Other times I actually drag the piece to its destination. I noticed the other day when I'm moving my knight piece that I actually make the L shape I was taught as a child. I wonder if many people do that.
5. I play the Sicilian from Black and at another website there are droves of people who respond with 2. Nc3. I know to respond with 2...Nc6, but I'm quite irritated by the whole thing. I refuse to learn any lines and just take those games as tactical learning...but I've noticed they tend to lead to central pawn clusters blockading any pleasurable movement and god do I hate that more than anything in the world. Calculating pawn options in a CC game is so tiring. Is that common with the Closed Sicilian?