1.d4 refuted...?


  • 20 months ago · Quote · #121

    Jion_Wansu

    D_for_DJ wrote:
    billyblatt wrote:

    Email this to Carlsen before its too late.

    all ready did.

    email my opening and its variations to Magnus Carlsen...

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #123

    D_for_DJ

    Cool

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #124

    ghostofmaroczy

    FirebrandX visited chesspub:
    TitanCG routinely misses the point:

    I think this is the "Dzinzi Indian defence.

    So it would seem:

    http://www.chesspublishing.com/content/10/jan12.htm

    The original Dzhindzhi Indian was

    1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nf3 a6 4 Nc3 c5 5 d5 b5

  • 5 months ago · Quote · #125

    D_for_DJ

    bvump

  • 5 months ago · Quote · #126

    D_for_DJ

    bvump

  • 5 months ago · Quote · #127

    camter

    Irontiger wrote:
    dmvdc wrote:
    schlechter55 wrote:

    there are whole books written about 1.d4 c5. this alone puts the rigorous claim that 1....c5 would be a 'mistake', in doubt.

    Hardly. I take no position on 1.d4 c5, whether it's good, bad, ugly, refuted, or sound. But whole books being written about something in chess reflects absolutely nothing about the topic. It just means someone needed a payday.

    Yep. I didn't need to search a source very far : http://www.amazon.com/Challenging-Sicilian-With-Repertoire-Books/dp/9548782375

     

    """"

    Only costs $117 per copy. USED!

  • 5 months ago · Quote · #128

    D_for_DJ

    bump

  • 2 months ago · Quote · #129

    D_for_DJ

    Bump

  • 2 months ago · Quote · #130

    Fixing_A_Hole

    Why do you keep bumping this dumbass topic? 


Back to Top

Post your reply: