Are You Strong Enough to Play the Ponziani

It turns out that even NMs are not beyond voicing complaints on the basic right of every being - the right for free expression (I think it's constitutional in the US, and in every democratic country). Although this one is more polite, and may even be in jest...

Agreed, I am also an fm and I question ponz, what are you?

<Ponz111> I'm helpless! Can't help you against all of your titled detractors - being the modestly rated player that I am... :-) (even though I should probably crush this self-proclaimed FM in blitz, judging from his rating...)

You must be damn good if you attract so much opposition! Hats off to you in any case 

And to quote the immortal John Lennon - "You may say I'm a dreamer - but I'm not the only one"

Don`t I have the right for free expression including stating my opinion about ponz11 and his posts? Did I ask to forbid him post here?

<NM Pacifique> - sure, you are well within your rights :-) no problem there. 

If you're an fm, why don't you apply for a free diamond membership?

These games were won by the vote chess team.  It was usually a team effort.

For example, I did not see the wonderful mate in 2.  Only one game shown here was my doing. 

I will always advocate for the Ponziani Opening as the propaganda against the opening has been beyond the pale.  Here we have a vote chess team using the Ponziani and winning 13 in a row and mostly against very tough teams.  The math chance of this is less than one in a hundred thousand.

Pacifique has for some reason decided he wants to be my enemy and always posts negative on threads I started.    

Firebrand often posts that he thinks the Ponziani Opening is not suitable for the very highest levels of chess engine aided ICCF Correspondence Chess.  But Firebrand has not made me an "enemy" and in fact we are friends. 

There is completely negative posting personal and there is posting saying the Ponziani is not suitable in a certain type of venue. 

This is the difference betweeen Pacifique and Firebrand.

I have nothing personal against you. Your claims about me, deciding to be your enemy are unbased, like most of your claims about Ponziani and chess in general.

But I have a problems with your posts in this forum - they are full of crap and misleading weaker players. And your inability to understand different opinions (often attributing your opponents with opinion they have never stated) and problems to admit your mistakes (claiming you have "secret variations", when variations you suggest are refuted, claiming obviously equal positions as better for your side etc.) has made me to stop argue with you about chess related questions. 

Your posts witnesses about your attempts to show off, seeking for attention, rather than search the truth. Lets take the first your post on "Ponziani opening" thread for example:

You behave like a preacher, closed-minded fanatic, deaf to different opinions. Don`t expect me to tolerate such a behaviour.

NM Pacifique don't use the word 'fanatic' without understanding it

Anybody can look through this thread and see the many prior posts of

Pacifique.

I should have said anyone can look through the main Ponziani posts...

Why do you think I dont understand it?

Yeah , didnt you know i am Fischer? We might play sometime

Well, If you are thinking 'I will be glad to address any questions on this opening.' sounds 'fanatic'....

 I hope you don't consider Magnus Carlsen being a weak player since he was the one using Ponzani Opening recently in a strong tournament.

Read the whole statement - he claims, that people who disagree with his opinion "have little knowledge of the Ponziani and are usually just parroting what they have heard."

Actually Carlsen is well known for playing rare, sometimes harmless openings/variations. Even the strongest players may use unpopular openings as surprise weapon, against unprepared opponents, like Kasparov, who hammered Anand in Evans gambit (Riga, 1995). It does not mean that these openings/variations will work against prepared opposition.

Roeczak  what questions do you  have regarding the Ponziani? [or is it my credentials you question?]  As I have said I am always willing to answer questions about the Ponziani.

If the Ponziani is suitable or not for the super grandmaster level?  While that is an interesting and debateable question--it does not really effect 99.99% of all chess players.

In this thread I am definitely a weak player. I just enjoyed those puzzles. I do not think that I can play at grandmaster level if I would have solved those puzzles. That would be silly.  I see the remarks that someone could play it at grandmaster level as a form of advertising humour. Intended or not. To know my level of play I only have to look at my rating. It is far more precise then anyone might say.

The Italians have a beautiful saying about the harsh reality of my rating:

'Times are hard, but modern.' :-)

Yes, "Are You Strong Enough to Play the Ponziani" is a little bit of humor [humour].  As is awarding grandmaster titles for anyone who could solve the puzzles. 

This particular theme is too hard for almost any player though the puzzles were solved by the Ponziani Power Team.