Yes the Parham is less common, although the percentages for the Parham are better.
Defences to the Parham Attack
Sort:
Gavi's database = 6 wins white, 5 wins black, 6 draws
My database = 4 wins black 1 draw
Combined = 6 wins white 9 wins black 7 draws
Percentages = 27% 41% 32%
Well that seems much worse than the ruy lopez.
Some notes - drawing % is about the same. So much for Gavi's claim that ruy draws more than parham.
- White winning % is lower with parham than with ruy lopez.
- Black winning % is higher with parham than with lopez.
Also, even in your database alone black's win % is abnormally high. Players prefer to play for 2 results, win or draw, rather than for 3.
In the world of statistics, small sample size makes results unreliable.
Shepi what database are you talking about? And the Ruy wins less than the Parham.
The_Gavinator wrote:
Yes I just took a statistics class, although there is no other reliable data, so you must proceed with caution, that's the issue with the Parham, is there's a lack of games.
And shepi what database are you talking about? And the Ruy wins less than the Parham.
The one here :), although I have access to about 5 other ones, would you like me to combine them all?
|
2010 | 2471/2378/2657 |
|
That's from chesstempo.com
Everyone knows that the 365chess openings databases are littered with many irrelevant and poorly-played games. Like half the games on there will turn out to be like "New Jersey Aspberger's Chess League, Under Nine" or the like.
If we had a database of only professional and master games, I'm sure the Parham would be not only more prevalent, but would be shown to win in greater proportion than many may think.
| 2. Qh5 | 13 |
|
Chessgames.com
Seems like every online DB except Gavinator's has black scoring better than white.
Yes, that's why I showed the percentages from the mainline, that excuses the idiots who get pwned because they don't know where to go after the 4 move mate attempt.
Shepi, 5 games total? Are you joking? That's hardly valuable, and that's on move 2.
Proceed with caution all you want, but if you don't have numbers, you're really just peddaling fairy tales and anecdotes about trivial nonsense.
Chesstempo after Ne2
|
2010 | 2476/2381/2657 |
|
5 isn't much worse than 17.
Especially if you realize I used 3 or more databases combined.
The_Gavinator wrote:
Yes I just took a statistics class, although there is no other reliable data, so you must proceed with caution, that's the issue with the Parham, is there's a lack of games.
And shepi what database are you talking about? And the Ruy wins less than the Parham.
I think it would be fair to say, but hard to prove and then account for the level of competition in those games. GM's don't play it, because they know it's basically a "crap shoot". So the reliability of the data being on par with the lines that GM's use, that we consider reputable, would have to be under scrutiny. Its like comparing cadillacs with yugos and saying that because people effectively commute with them by percentage, at a better rate than the cadi's, that somehow makes them better.
The results may also be systematically skewed, because most people will only play this against someone they think they are about guaranteed to beat anyway. If that's true, then the mediocre results for White are even more discouraging.
Hey KCO, don't ask for whom the bell trolls!