Aggressive Response to 4...Nf6 in the Scotch

CHCL

Not one Chess champion played the Parham, and you are trying to tell us it is so good? Seriously, it is a stupid opening. Even the KG is better.

The_Gavinator

At least the Parham doesn't give away material and position...

Conquistador

Wait, are you saying you want to play it as white?

Conquistador

I personally don't care which side to play.  I never played a game with it as white though.  At least I have theory to back me up.  Sounds interesting.

Helzeth
The_Gavinator wrote:

At least the Parham doesn't give away material and position...

wrong.

The_Gavinator

Really, cuz in jetfighter's like 10 boards, white had better position in almost all of them.

Ben_Dubuque

here is what happens after 3. Nf6

Ben_Dubuque

school, most people don't get out stateside until June.

The_Gavinator

Lol that's funny you'd say that considering you failed your last math and chem quiz. I got the highest non-indian grade in the class on chemistry.

And here was my schedule yesterday:

1. Test and Calculator Games

2. Chess w/ Friends

3. Movies/Pink Floyd

4. Movies/Jewish Food

5. Connect 4/Pink Floyd

6. Chess/Pink Floyd

7. Movies/Chess w/ Friends

8. Movies

It's actually amazing how Americans arent't the smartest in the world...

The_Gavinator

Lol at least I don't fail tests...

Helzeth
The_Gavinator wrote:

Really, cuz in jetfighter's like 10 boards, white had better position in almost all of them.

and if you tried to refute the sicilian black would be better in every board there, too.

Does this mean that the sicilian is winning for black?

Helzeth

Did you log on wrong account when you wrote that?

I'm pretty damn convinced that whatupyodog is just gavinator using an engine.

Helzeth

In that case I'll give whatup an russian apology.

Förlåt.

There you go. I withdraw my accusation

Helzeth

I'm not an attacking player but I'd much rather play white if you play 14. rd1. Threat of nd5 is in the air and a bounch of stuff.
Shrug.

CHCL
TonyH

Its amusing to me to watch certain people mate statements as 1300 players with such passion. It is very typical of teenagers to feel they have figured things out based on their short life experience. The simple fact is that they lack the experience and have for whatever reason are passionately sticking to a belief because they are emotionally committed to it. One of the first things anyone should realize in chess (and life) is that it is ok to be wrong, infact being wrong and making mistakes are essential to improvement but so recognizing your errors and correcting them. 

Granted at times a new approach is useful but they also have to prove it with results. This is called the scientific method. You make a statement and prove it under certain conditions. Myself, alex and most certainly Pfren could beat jetfighter and gravinator in a game using any first move from either side this doesnt validate the ideas presented by the opening.

I would recommend anyone but especially Gravinator and Jetfighter to read Chess strategy for club players by grooten. It is one of the best books I have read in a long time and gives a relatively simple and effective way to assess postions . Nothing is perfect but its a great start and the author is a coach that has several strong (IM) level players as a result. ITs not perfect but its very logical in its presentation. 

Finally the King's gambit is actually VERY positional in its approach. Federov played it quite often as a GM and so did a US senior master rated 2400 (I cannt recall the name) and they played it not so much with an attack in mind but as a positional advantage. The reason you dont see it as often is that it is very double edged. THis means that the likelyhood of a losing result for the white player is higher than in other possible attempts. is this a bad thing? well if your plan is to pay for your rent and eat it could be. The other issue is that because of the wild tactical melee that ensues the tension in the position can  be resolved too quickly and the players end up with nothing to work with. At the amateur level this is usually not the case but as you move up it is. The ability to manage such positions is also 'required' knowledge. While Black has systems that can give it equal chances the task is challenging and more challenging than equalizing in the patzer opening 2. Qh5. And this is where the evidence to support a particular idea in an opening fails, How easily does black equalize? (ie gain equal chances in the middlegame)

Rubidium
TonyH wrote:

Its amusing to me to watch certain people mate statements as 1300 players with such passion. It is very typical of teenagers to feel they have figured things out based on their short life experience. The simple fact is that they lack the experience and have for whatever reason are passionately sticking to a belief because they are emotionally committed to it. One of the first things anyone should realize in chess (and life) is that it is ok to be wrong, infact being wrong and making mistakes are essential to improvement but so recognizing your errors and correcting them. 

Granted at times a new approach is useful but they also have to prove it with results. This is called the scientific method. You make a statement and prove it under certain conditions. Myself, alex and most certainly Pfren could beat jetfighter and gravinator in a game using any first move from either side this doesnt validate the ideas presented by the opening.

I would recommend anyone but especially Gravinator and Jetfighter to read Chess strategy for club players by grooten. It is one of the best books I have read in a long time and gives a relatively simple and effective way to assess postions . Nothing is perfect but its a great start and the author is a coach that has several strong (IM) level players as a result. ITs not perfect but its very logical in its presentation. 

Finally the King's gambit is actually VERY positional in its approach. Federov played it quite often as a GM and so did a US senior master rated 2400 (I cannt recall the name) and they played it not so much with an attack in mind but as a positional advantage. The reason you dont see it as often is that it is very double edged. THis means that the likelyhood of a losing result for the white player is higher than in other possible attempts. is this a bad thing? well if your plan is to pay for your rent and eat it could be. The other issue is that because of the wild tactical melee that ensues the tension in the position can  be resolved too quickly and the players end up with nothing to work with. At the amateur level this is usually not the case but as you move up it is. The ability to manage such positions is also 'required' knowledge. While Black has systems that can give it equal chances the task is challenging and more challenging than equalizing in the patzer opening 2. Qh5. And this is where the evidence to support a particular idea in an opening fails, How easily does black equalize? (ie gain equal chances in the middlegame)

The best post so far on this forum.

Ben_Dubuque

no more respectful, and with more to back it up, honestly I don't have the money for a chess book, because I would probably have a few

The_Gavinator

Damn whatupyodog got smoked by a Double Muzio, nice going... I remember I'd showed that to you as a possible blitz weapon and you said it sucks lol...

CHCL
The_Gavinator wrote:

Damn whatupyodog got smoked by a Double Muzio, nice going... I remember I'd showed that to you as a possible blitz weapon and you said it sucks lol...

LOL

This forum topic has been locked