@XPlayerX, and I claim that the Berlin is not better than the Breyer or Marshall.
Which is "factual " again.
Breyer, Marshall or Berlin Wall?
Sort:
HolyKing wrote:
@XPlayerX, and I claim that the Berlin is not better than the Breyer or Marshall.
Which is "factual " again.
No what your saying is an opinion!
The most natural way of entering the Breyer or Marshall is with 3...a6
The most natural way of entering the Berlin is with 3...Nf6
For your claim to be true you would have to prove 3...a6 is better than 3...Nf6.
whooooooooooooosh wrote:
Right. I'm not sure you understand the connotation of "coffee house" with regard to chess.
- Coffeehouse
- Adjective used to describe a move, player, or style of play characterized by risky, positionally dubious play that sets traps for the opponent.
The above is the Wikipedia definition.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_chess#C
I think the Marshall Attack can be risky & trappy.
In high level games white has found a way to defend.
Yeah I think calling the Marshall Attack Coffeehouse in nature is perfectly acceptable way of describing it.
Apr 6, 2016
0
#185
The Morphy Variations of the Spanish (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6!) encourages white to retreat with 4.Ba4. Obviously, when White plays 4.Ba4, he is no longer attacking. And since he's no longer attacking, he must have lost his initiative. 4.Ba4 is therefore probably dubious, making the entire Spanish dubious!
lolurspammed wrote:
But the Marshall is far from dubious.
Very true.
So what would we call the Marshall.
Half Coffee House?
or
Decaf Coffee House lol!
Apr 6, 2016
0
#188
No, the Marshall is the refutation of the Spanish. The rest of the variations are just white's attempts to obfuscate the issue.
It's clear that once White has lost the initiative on move four that he's just hanging on.
X_PLAYER_J_X wrote:
lolurspammed wrote:
But the Marshall is far from dubious.
Very true.
So what would we call the Marshall.
Half Coffee House?
or
Decaf Coffee House lol!
Um, I'm not sure why you insist the words "coffee" and "house" be used in the description of the Marshall.
SmyslovFan wrote:
No, the Marshall is the refutation of the Spanish. The rest of the variations are just white's attempts to obfuscate the issue.
It's clear that once White has lost the initiative on move four that he's just hanging on.
This reminds me of an Ivanchuk quote, where he tongue-in-cheek said that 8 c3(?!) is a mistake, after which White has to fight for a draw.
Do you know what coffeehouse means? This would describe stuff like the Fishing Pole which just plays for tricks and is not positionally justified. The main reason people tend to avoid the Marshall is even if they manage to trade queens and not get mated, they will still struggle to win. An opening that gives up a pawn, allows a queen trade, and is still pretty much fine must be positionally well founded. It sounds like the opposite of coffeehouse to me!
Apr 6, 2016
0
#192
JMB, you had to answer the comment seriously, didn't you?
Of course, you're right. Perhaps at the U1800 level though, the Marshall is a bit of a coffeehouse opening. I've seen quite a few A players win nice tactical games from the Black side of the Marshall. Black can get a pretty nasty attack if White makes even a slight misstep.
SmyslovFan wrote:
JMB, you had to answer the comment seriously, didn't you?
Of course, you're right. Perhaps at the U1800 level though, the Marshall is a bit of a coffeehouse opening. I've seen quite a few A players win nice tactical games from the Black side of the Marshall. Black can get a pretty nasty attack if White makes even a slight misstep.
Yes, of course, Black gets a big attack if White isn't careful. That's one of the main attractions of the Marshall at club level. I myself have been on the Black side of quite a few mating attacks in the Marshall, even against experts and, occasionally, masters. But any opening that is played regularily by GMs should simply not be referred to as "coffee house".
I have a better idea.
@X_PLAYER_J_X: You just don't get it. You make the ludicrous claim that the Berlin is better than the Breyer and Marshall (cough), because the Breyer involves a backward knight move (cough), and because the Marshall gives up a pawn for a coffeehouse attack (cough). However, you then say in response to whooooooooooosh's sarcastic answer that the doubled pawns and the central king might be a strength. (double standard #1)
You then backtrack and say "I never said that" (cough), and make an absurd claim that in order to prove the Berlin is not better than the Breyer and Marshall, you have to prove that 3... a6 is better than 3... Nf6 (cough). In reality, you have to prove the opposite.
What is wrong with you people?
Are you all sick and twisted?
I honestly don't know why you guys are making this so complicated!
Guys here is a visual!
Look at the position guys!
I said " In the Breyer they play a retreating knight move Nb8"
Look at the below visual:
Your response:
Yes, X_Player_J_X they do retreat the knight backwards!
It is a simple fact!
You can visually see it moving backwards.
The opposite of moving forwards!
Why are you guys struggling with this?
Why are you making this such a big deal?
It is a backward repositioning knight move.
However, the knight is still going backwards?
A little kid can understand what I am saying here.
Please let it go guys!
Stop thinking about the backward knight move.
I am sorry for ever mentioning it!