@XPlayerX, , in that logic, isnt the Ruy lopez not the best as white plays Nf1("a backward retreating move" ) in some lines. Lol.
Breyer, Marshall or Berlin Wall?
Sort:
HolyKing wrote:
@XPlayerX, , in that logic, isnt the Ruy lopez not the best as white plays Nf1("a backward retreating move" ) in some lines. Lol.
Don't ever attempt to show the moon to the idiot: he will always look at the finger.
Oh... and I can vaguely recall this game- maybe there are others too:
Mr. x_nobody is again trying to amuse the masses. He doesn't even have to try: being comical and laughable is his nature.
I find it funny that Pfren uses the following phrase:
Don't ever attempt to show the moon to the idiot: he will always look at the finger.
Post #189-195 show this perfectly.
You hang your responses on every detail word I say!
FACT = Breyer (Nb8) backward knight move!
FACT = Marshall (gives up 1 pawn to attack) Some could call it a coffee house attack!
FACT = Anatoly Karpov rarely played against the Marshall Attack!
As for Pfren's Anatoly Karpov game example.
It proves only that Anatoly Karpov couldn't recall that he faced it!
However, it doesn't matter that he couldn't recall that he faced it.
Even if you was to find 10 Marshall Attack games against Anatoly Karpov it would still prove me correct.
The reason why is because Anatoly Karpov played chess for 10+ years.
Playing the Marshall Attack 1 time ever year only demonstrates how rare it is.
I write a post saying lets talk about the Berlin Defense.
You guys read the whole post and focus in on only 3 sentences.
The Backward knight move, The Marshall being coffee house attack, & trying to prove Karpov played 1 Marshall game?
You guys are looking at the finger.
Where I live we have a term for people like you.
We call them "Goobers!"
Stop hanging your responses on dumb details!
Look at the big picture!
You all have missed the big picture.
The big picture is you are wasting your time talking about the Marshall when you will rarely see it or get the chance to play it.
You guys are wasting the OP's time!
Why should the OP learn a line he will rarely see or rarely even be able to play?
Do you guys have some vendetta against the Berlin Defense?
Has the Berlin Defense crushed & burned you so many times that talking about it brings up painful memories?
Is the Berlin Defense a sensitive subject for you all?
The Marshall counter attack is not just a line. It's a stylistic preference. Someone who feel comfortable to the tactical - technical implications Marshall is giving, then why to prefer the Berlin?
I have respect for both three choices, even I don't play none of them.
The problem is yours X players. You are too closed minded and stubborn like a mule to your beliefs. You need to change. Chess is a big world to make him look smaller.
X_PLAYER_J_X wrote:
Do you guys have some vendetta against the Berlin Defense?
Has the Berlin Defense crushed & burned you so many times that talking about it brings up painful memories?
Is the Berlin Defense a sensitive subject for you all?
The Berlin's been discussed ad nauseum lately, so it's nice to talk about other lines for a change. Do you have some sort of vendetta against the Marshall or Breyer?
@Xplayerx, Yeah we are all idiots. BTW, I think the Op has already decided on the Breyer maybe, at least he hasnt showed up. Play the Berlin if you want. But do not talk about thingswith a wrong attitude. I do not claim to be better than you. But seriously "retreating backward knight move" certainly gives a bad impression about you,
Ps : please do not write an essay.
Also; if the Marshall isn't worth discussing because it gives away a pawn, and the Breyer isn't worth discussing because it involves retreating a Knight, let's now list all the reasons not to talk about the Berlin Ending (3...Nf6 4 0-0 Nxe4 5 d4 Nd6 6 Bxc6 dxc6 7 dxe5:
1. You get doubled pawns! Doubled pawns are bad!
2. It gives White a space advantage and chances to attack on the Kingside!
3. Black loses the right to castle! Oh no!
Black's position has three detriments! Who would voluntarily play such a position but a patzer???
/s
Apr 6, 2016
0
#170
Expect to see at least one Breyer in the WCC this year. Magnus used it as his main weapon vs the Ruy for years before 2015, simply because the Berlin is fashion.
It got popular after the match in which Kasparov lost the title, it is not particularly avant-garde nor out of standard. Very drawish.
HolyKing wrote:
@Xplayerx, Yeah we are all idiots. BTW, I think the Op has already decided on the Breyer maybe, at least he hasnt showed up. Play the Berlin if you want. But do not talk about thingswith a wrong attitude. I do not claim to be better than you. But seriously "retreating backward knight move" certainly gives a bad impression about you,
Ps : please do not write an essay.
In response to text in red.
Of course he is going to pick the Breyer when everyone is spoon feeding him Breyer and Marshall suggestions.
They don't have the back bone to talk about the Berlin Defense!
Furthermore, The Berlin Wall Endgame isn't even forced white can avoid it!
In response to text in orange.
The knight does retreat backwards that is a fact!
In response to text in blue.
I am just warming up buddy.
That wasn't an essay that was me free lancing!
I can type 150 words per second.
Drinking a coke burning 140 calories RPM.
whooooooooooooosh wrote:
The Berlin's been discussed ad nauseum lately, so it's nice to talk about other lines for a change. Do you have some sort of vendetta against the Marshall or Breyer?
I disagree.
I think people are avoiding the conversation!
whooooooooooooosh wrote:
Also; if the Marshall isn't worth discussing because it gives away a pawn, and the Breyer isn't worth discussing because it involves retreating a Knight, let's now list all the reasons not to talk about the Berlin Ending (3...Nf6 4 0-0 Nxe4 5 d4 Nd6 6 Bxc6 dxc6 7 dxe5:
1. You get doubled pawns! Doubled pawns are bad!
2. It gives White a space advantage and chances to attack on the Kingside!
3. Black loses the right to castle! Oh no!
Black's position has three detriments! Who would voluntarily play such a position but a patzer???
Those reasons are perfect examples of why we should talk about the Berlin Defense!
Case and point!
#1 Who says those double pawns are bad?
They could be a potiental strength!
#2 Is whites space advantage sufficent?
#3 Black loses castle rights! However, is black's king better prepared to reach the center in the endgame?
These examples only add more fuel to the fire on why the Berlin Defense should be talked about!
Thank you for proving my point!
X_PLAYER_J_X wrote:
whooooooooooooosh wrote:
Also; if the Marshall isn't worth discussing because it gives away a pawn, and the Breyer isn't worth discussing because it involves retreating a Knight, let's now list all the reasons not to talk about the Berlin Ending (3...Nf6 4 0-0 Nxe4 5 d4 Nd6 6 Bxc6 dxc6 7 dxe5:
1. You get doubled pawns! Doubled pawns are bad!
2. It gives White a space advantage and chances to attack on the Kingside!
3. Black loses the right to castle! Oh no!
Black's position has three detriments! Who would voluntarily play such a position but a patzer???
Those reasons are perfect examples of why we should talk about the Berlin Defense!
Case and point!
#1 Who says those double pawns are bad?
They could be a potiental strength!
#2 Is whites space advantage sufficent?
#3 Black loses castle rights! However, is black's king better prepared to reach the center in the endgame?
These examples only add more fuel to the fire on why the Berlin Defense should be talked about!
Thank you for proving my point!
I thought it was pretty obvious I was being sarcastic. Anyways, since you've so convicingly refuted my points (/s), let me have a go at yours:
...Nb8 in the Breyer reposts the Knight to a more harmoious spot, while allowing his c-pawn to participate in the action, whether via ...c5 or ...c6. This "tempo-loss" isn't such a big deal in a closed position, especially since White is usually going Nb1-d2-f1-e3/g3 anyways.
Sacrificing a pawn in the Marshall is one of the most positionally justified gambits in all of chess. White has to, first of all, contend with serious light-squared weaknesses around his King, and Black certainly gets attacking chances with ...f5-f4 if White isn't careful. However, even if the first player manages to stem the tide, and get Queens off, he often find endings difficult to win as well, on account of Black's activity and lack of clear weaknesses. So, really, anything but a coffeehouse sack.
Thanks
jengaias wrote:
If Berlin wasn't crazy popular , guys like X_PLAYER would call it "kindergarden defense".
He doesn't like Breyer for repostioning the knight with Nb8-Nd7 but in Berlin the repositioning phase is crazy and players spend much more time to reposition the pieces than in any other defense.
So Breyer is harmless because of the "backward retreating" move Nb8(which aims to reposition the knight o d7) while Berlin of the 6 knight and 2 king moves from the first 11, is a top class defense.
X_PLAYER must first say loud what he is going to write.Maybe that wil prevent him in the future from saying such nonsense.
Thank you, Jengaias for admitting the struggles you have with understanding the Berlin Defense.
It is filled with very deep rooted ideas!
By admitting your weakness it will help you to over come them!
@XPX,
The "fact" does not make Breyer bad which was the impression you tried to create in post 188. The "backward retreating "move happens to be one of the best moves on the board.
Now why would white want to avoid the Berlin endgame? White has his slight advantage and can play the position. As for the OP, he claims that he is inclined to sharpness and this makes us think that he wants more than a queenless endgame. That is the reason people are suggesting Breyer and Marshall.
whooooooooooooosh wrote:
I thought it was pretty obvious I was being sarcastic. Anyways, since you've so convicingly refuted my points (/s), let me have a go at yours:
...Nb8 in the Breyer reposts the Knight to a more harmoious spot, while allowing his c-pawn to participate in the action, whether via ...c5 or ...c6. This "tempo-loss" isn't such a big deal in a closed position, especially since White is usually going Nb1-d2-f1-e3/g3 anyways.
Sacrificing a pawn in the Marshall is one of the most positionally justified gambits in all of chess. White has to, first of all, contend with serious light-squared weaknesses around his King, and Black certainly gets attacking chances with ...f5-f4 if White isn't careful. However, even if the first player manages to stem the tide, and get Queens off, he often find endings difficult to win as well, on account of Black's activity and lack of clear weaknesses. So, really, anything but a coffeehouse sack.
Thanks
I didn't refute your points.
Simply because your points are factual!
Furthemore, You can't refute my points either since my points are factual as well!
I never said anything about a tempo-loss.
I never said Nb8 was a good or bad move either?
I said "Nb8 is a retreating knight move"
Which is factual!
I never said the Marshall was a good or bad line.
I said "It sacs a pawn for a coffee house attack".
Which is factual again!
x_nobody nonsense.
In the Chigorin and Keres Ruys, Black eventually wastes more moves to redeploy the oddly placed a5 knight... e.g. in the Rubinstein variation this knight follows the majestic tour Nc6-a5-c6-d8-f7, which is preferrable to the more economical Nc6-a5-b7, as the knight at b7 is frequently out of real play.
Here is one patzer who wastes that many moves with his knight, but fortunately for him he played an amateur, and escaped with a draw:
X_PLAYER_J_X wrote:
whooooooooooooosh wrote:
I thought it was pretty obvious I was being sarcastic. Anyways, since you've so convicingly refuted my points (/s), let me have a go at yours:
...Nb8 in the Breyer reposts the Knight to a more harmoious spot, while allowing his c-pawn to participate in the action, whether via ...c5 or ...c6. This "tempo-loss" isn't such a big deal in a closed position, especially since White is usually going Nb1-d2-f1-e3/g3 anyways.
Sacrificing a pawn in the Marshall is one of the most positionally justified gambits in all of chess. White has to, first of all, contend with serious light-squared weaknesses around his King, and Black certainly gets attacking chances with ...f5-f4 if White isn't careful. However, even if the first player manages to stem the tide, and get Queens off, he often find endings difficult to win as well, on account of Black's activity and lack of clear weaknesses. So, really, anything but a coffeehouse sack.
Thanks
I never said the Marshall was a good or bad line.
I said "It sacs a pawn for a coffee house attack".
Which is factual again!
Right. I'm not sure you understand the connotation of "coffee house" with regard to chess.
Bckward retreating move the Breyer and coffee house attack the Marshall.
Rare wisdom ladies and gentlemen.
What a deep understanding!!!!
I am amazed and speechless!!!!
p.s.This is what happens when someone studies only openings.He can't see past his nose but he thinks himself as somekind of an expert that he can call Marshall , coffee house attack , just because noone played it against Karpov.
Certainly the undisputable winner for the oscar of the "Biggest Nonsense of the year".
Please forgive me great Jengaias.
I am so inferior to your chess understanding.
In the Breyer black plays the Forward Attacking Move Nc6 to Nb8.
In the Marshall Attack Black gives up 1 pawn to positionally squeeze white like a python.