Defences to the Parham Attack
Sort:
[COMMENT DELETED]
gambiteer12 wrote:
Nakamura said it was playable. Saying its playable is not the same as supporting it. The Muzio Gambit is playable and many other stupid things named after animals. Several GM's???? Quotes please?
"I do believe that 2.Qh5 is a playable move, in fact I had a very good position in the game, and was close to winning if I had in fact played 23.e5."
Hikaru Nakamura
Between players of rank 1400-2400 this opening is fine.
Unless you're playing a Super GM,
The game will be even. You are arguing from the point of view of machines.
NM
Yes he is a National MASTER. And Nakamura said he was WINNING, against a 2600.
The_Gavinator wrote:
Mr. Parham is a NM, IM Pfren world be able to beat him.
CHCL wrote:
The_Gavinator wrote:
Mr. Parham is a NM, IM Pfren world be able to beat him.
Nakamura is in the top ten. Are you trolling?
[COMMENT DELETED]
Eris_Discordia wrote:
Nakamura wouldn't play the Parham.
http://www.365chess.com/search_result.php?search=1&m=4&n=838&ms=e4.e5.Qh5.Nc6&wid=8099
[COMMENT DELETED]
with two draws...
I'm sorry I didn't finish my statement. Nakamura wouldn't play the Parham in a real game against pfren, based on the fact that he hasn't played the Parham in seven years.
GM's tend to draw, I know you're not very smart, but that's how it is.
On that database Black had a 59% win ratio, which is not very good.
CHCL wrote:
On that database Black had a 59% win ratio, which is not very good.
That tells us that white won 7 games, black won 6 games, and 4 were drawn. Which proves absolutely nothing.
No, it shows that the Parham Attack scores about the same as other major openings when you play the reasonable line.
No it doesn't, because in major openings the score is based on thousands of games, seventeen games aren't going to give an accurate comparison.
why did you lose against Shepi?
Wait, if that isn't a masters database then why is he showing it to us.