1.d4 refuted...?

Sort:
ivandh
schlechter55 a écrit :

The clock is ticking for DJ_DJ.

I'll bet he's really biting his nails.

D_for_DJ
schlechter55 wrote:

To end those fake and provoking claims of DJ:

I want to see a proof, by analysis, real variants, with evaluations that are plausible at their end. A proof that shows to everyone who has FIDE rating 2100 and up that 1.d4 c5, 2.d5 g6, 3.c4 Bg7, 4.Nc3 Bxc3+, 5.bxc3 f5 is 'winning for Black'.

Or at least proving that it gives Black a slight advantage.

He did not do it.

He cannot do it.

He knows that he can't.

To the contrary, he knows at least that the exchange Bxc3 followed by f5 is double-edged and risky for Black. If he doesn't know it, then he used in all games, that he proudly presents here, a strong engine, and he won because of that, and only because of that. 

If he does not show proofs for his claim here - I give him one week for that, not more, I am mercyful, as you see - then he is proven to be an imposter.

some one is mad that 1.d4 refuted. I bet your whole world has been turn on your head! 

D_for_DJ

The visionary starts with a clean sheet of paper, and re-imagines the world.
Malcolm Gladwell 

schlechter55

Ok DJ, i think the case is closed. You were not able to provide any analysis.

Meaning that you cannot provide it.

ivandh

Well that proves it beyond doubt! All the d4 books in the bin!

schlechter55 a écrit :

Ok DJ, i think the case is closed. You were not able to provide any analysis.

Meaning that you cannot provide it.

Look man, don't be jealous of his amazing genius and good looks.

schlechter55

I am not be jealous, because I would beat him in every game OTB.

I just hate when people lie.

TitanCG
schlechter55 wrote:Ok DJ, i think the case is closed. You were not able to provide any analysis.Meaning that you cannot provide it.
The search for opening analysis continues lol
LoveYouSoMuch
schlechter55 wrote:

I am not be jealous, because I would beat him in every game OTB.

I just hate when people lie.

that sounds like quite a claim. what's your otb rating?

steve_bute

1.d4 was refuted by 1.e4.

schlechter55

My otb rating is 2250.

This so-called Deejaydeejay has made claims, and they are are inconsistent with common chess knowledge. My conclusion is, he has low rating, and he plays with engine support.

ivandh
schlechter55 a écrit :

My otb rating is 2250.

This so-called Deejaydeejay has made claims, and they are are inconsistent with common chess knowledge. My conclusion is, he has low rating, and he plays with engine support.

Lol now you're the one who is lying. Do you hate yourself?

schlechter55

what makes you think I am lying and not Deejay ? He said 1.d4 IS refuted, and shows (as his only proofs) some correspondence games, all with the same side variant in a Benoni.

There are only two possibilities:

1. He knows he is wrong.

2. He doesn't know. then he is a weak player, and hence he used an engine during the games.

In both cases he is lying.

D_for_DJ
schlechter55 wrote:

what makes you think I am lying and not Deejay ? He said 1.d4 IS refuted, and shows (as his only proofs) some correspondence games, all with the same side variant in a Benoni.

There are only two possibilities:

1. He knows he is wrong.

2. He doesn't know. then he is a weak player, and hence he used an engine during the games.

In both cases he is lying.

i prove alot by beating your 1.d4 into the ground. Like i said 1.d4 REFUTED!!! Trolololololol Cool

D_for_DJ

Here is the game where i Refuted Schlechter55 1.d4.  Enjoy !!!

[Event "Let's Play!"]

[Site "Chess.com"]

[Date "2013.05.13"]

[Round "?"]

[White "schlechter55"]

[Black "D_for_DJ"]

[Result "0-1"]

[WhiteElo "2152"]

[BlackElo "1273"]

[PlyCount "50"]

[EventDate "2013.??.??"]

[TimeControl "1"]


1. d4 c5 2. d5 g6 3. c4 Bg7 4. Nc3 Bxc3+ 5. bxc3 f5 6. h4 Qa5 7. Qc2 Nf6 8. Nh3

d6 9. Nf4 Nbd7 10. h5 g5 11. Ne6 Ne5 12. Rb1 Ne4 13. Rb3 Bxe6 14. dxe6 Nxc4 15.

g4 O-O-O 16. gxf5 d5 17. Bg2 Qa6 18. Bxe4 dxe4 19. Qxe4 Rhf8 20. Bxg5 Nd6 21.

Qb1 Nxf5 22. e4 Qc6 23. Rg1 Nd6 24. Rg4 Rg8 25. f3 Nc4 0-1

 

D_for_DJ
ivandh wrote:
schlechter55 a écrit :

My otb rating is 2250.

This so-called Deejaydeejay has made claims, and they are are inconsistent with common chess knowledge. My conclusion is, he has low rating, and he plays with engine support.

Lol now you're the one who is lying. Do you hate yourself?

I agree with Ivandh. He is just jelly of my muffins. Cool

schlechter55

I find it funny. Deejay still not realizes how thin the air around him became. He does not even try to give an analysis.

schlechter55

It is again the common misunderstanding what a 'mistake' is.

If you just mean that White has an advantage after 1....c5, I am fine with it.

But the word 'mistake' sounds like much more.

Aren't there other well-established black defenses that give white an advantage, too ?

Like 1.e4 Nf6, 1.e4 b6, perhaps even 1.d4 f5.

But nobody is calling them 'mistakes'. For the mere reason that the advantage that white gets is not a winning advantage, and black has counterplay.

drmnc1

Why is everyone having this completely ridiculous discussion!? To say that 1.d4 is refuted by 1...c5 just by posting a few games by some untitled nobodies having online blitz games is an absolutely incredible and absurd claim to make!

TheGreatOogieBoogie

If Capablanca can't refute 1.d4 with 1...c5 then I don't think anyone could.  Even though he won the game he came out with a slight advantage for white, just like any other opening. 

 



D_for_DJ

Cool