Chess.com V.S. GM Alexander Onischuk

Sort:
knightdropFTW

This is it Members of the Chess.com Alliance! What the Alliance was created to do and what we have been practicing for this past year!  We should start by recruiting vote chess players to bring the discussion here in fear of the trolls that harmed the last game. I wanted to make a post here because chess.com pings everyone when a new topic has been posted whereas it does not when a new Vote game is starting soon. Good Luck everybody! Let's WIN this for chess.com!!!

 

Btw, GM Onischuk is rated 200 points higher than GM Pogonina and she crushed us...we're doomed...    :/

However I think we are better as a team this time around so hopefully it will go better.

Coach_Valentin

It seems like a message to the broader forum would need to be formulated very well, or else it will be interpreted as a sign of separation -- not a good think when a new team has just been formed.

Ideas on how not to sound like we're disregarding "the will of masses" and forming a parallel discussion? 

I assume we want it mostly targeted for participants who have not experienced previous such vote games (especially very large vote games) and for whom the notion might be quite new that there tend to be a few who occupy the airwaves with no meaningful message versus many who have a message but which gets drowned out in the noise.

the_whitebeard

or else we could follow an opposite strategy.

I think that trying to sell the concept of the Alliance to the many that have not requested us anything of the kind will appear as an “elitarian deviationism” and possibly put  Alliance in a bad light.

Most of people will participate to the game just because excited to play against a GM and any attempt to tell them “it would be better to follow our advice” would likely be rejected. The same applies as far as the recruiting is concerned.

Taking into consideration that for first 3 to 5 moves the majority will follow database indications about the most successful continuation and that during such a period a considerable share of more inconsistent birds will flow away, I also think the Alliance members wishing to participate to the game could simply intervene in the debate by:

·        introducing themselves as “Alliance members”

·        suggesting the move to be played as a result of a collective restricted discussion within Alliance

·        inviting people wishing to know more about the “Alliance” to visit its page and/or to contact any of its administrators

In addition we may ourselves separately contact those players that by the quality of their advices and of the kind of their submitting could appears potential Alliance new members

Coach_Valentin

Words of wisdom! 

I like this plan, and at present see no downsides to it, and no better alternative.

OM63

very nice plan the_whitebeard. I like it as well.

JRoyer

This is awesome, and 24 hours per move. I cannot wait to see the Alliance's analysis presented during the match.

CaptainJimTKirk

I think we must invite more members with posting the link of the group to the game from now ( not waiting the game beggins ) , what are you thinking ? More members of the group more votes for our move Cool

Coach_Valentin

While broader representation can be indeed helpful, I am not sure how this fits in with the idea suggested by the_whitebeard (above) -- which seems reasonable and we, in principle, agree with.

The first few moves of a game are always out of a database and can't be argued much; they are often a matter of personal preference by players.  That said, we may be able to have impact at the start of a game by suggesting broad paths that may be effective against the given opponent, e.g., a more tactical/dynamic/sharp game versus a more solid/positional/static structure.

Do we know which of these two types of games GM Onischuk prefers to go in himself?

JRoyer

Hello Alliance,

Here is the information we need for GM Alexander Onischuk:

http://ratings.fide.com/card.phtml?event=14101025

Coach_Valentin

Does this provide any information about actual games and openings?  I know it does about ratings and opponents...

JRoyer

Absolutely _valentin_,

Here is that link:

http://ratings.fide.com/view_games.phtml?id=14101025&name=%22Onischuk__Alexander(USA)%22 

knightdropFTW
1. d4  288

36.8%

51.4%

1. e4  58

39.7%

44.8%

15.5
1. c4  33

27.3%

54.5%

18.2%
1. Nf3  7

85.7%

14.3

 

Here are th first move percentages from Chessgames.com

I don't have data for past move 1 since I do not have an account on Chessgames, but what I can gather from various websites, our opponent seems to main the Queen's gambit and Slav openings.

Coach_Valentin

I like his repertoire; I play the same, with both colors. Wink

Sometimes, GMs in simuls or other exhibition games deviate quite significantly from their traditional opening repertoire, though.  I hope not this time.

knightdropFTW

I know it won't matter at all sine he will be skilled at any opening, but we probably should not play into his favorite openings. Therefore, d5 will not be helpful to us. That was one problem with the Pogonina game is we let her play her main opening. Someone on the comments section of the game noticed he has the worst percentages against the Grunfeld for what it's worth.

CaptainJimTKirk

Ha , a GM plays well all openings...

Coach_Valentin

It'll be important, in my view, to play solid openings regardless of whether they are Onischuk's favorites or not. 

Ultimately, we will learn from the experience, while the end result will depend only partly on the opening -- so it makes little sense to avoid a particular line or opening (that are otherwise good and we play them well) solely for the purpose of escaping from the GM's known repertoire.  In a 24-hour per move game, he can consult the opening database and his memory to his heart's content, just like we can.  Therefore, he can be almost as strong in any opening.

I have nothing personal against the Gruenfeld.  My concern is that it's a complex opening for black -- the piece play is critical to ensure counterplay to white's dominance in the center and the likely passed d-pawn that occurs frequently -- and unless we have several experienced high-rated players among the team, it'll not be a good choice overall, since we won't know how to properly execute the ideas.  (Just as it happened in the game against Natalia Pogonina -- we didn't have anyone from the active participants who had played the Opochensky variation in the Sicilian a lot.)

CaptainJimTKirk

I think Sicilian Najdorf is best

Coach_Valentin

Welcome, LaskerFan!

I would recommend picking a closed or semi-closed opening against such a strong opponent.  Otherwise, the chance to get blown away uncontrollably before we can understand what is happening is quite significant, given that we will have a thousand voters many of whom aren't inclined to take suggestions from us (or from anyone else).

Coach_Valentin

Those are all fine choices you propose, in my view.

I just don't think we should go into anything like KID, Gruenfeld, or Sicilian -- as much as they are trendy openings with good play for both sides, they are far too complex for a group of a super-large size like we would be having, and they all contain lots of underwater reefs.

Vyomo

I suggest that we use the Old Benoni against d4 and the Pirc against e4.

As for c4, I suggest c5, it's not very common and we can use it to our advantage

However for all of these, we must utilise our time to understand the key ideas of each.

I am also thinking about the french winawer which is also good.