Defences to the Parham Attack
Sort:
[COMMENT DELETED]
The_Gavinator wrote:
I don't know how old you are, but in a government, or history class, or something like that, you will learn about Facism. That is similar to communism, but everybody must "worship" their leader. So chess.com makes it so that everybody must only play mainline opneings, and if they try to have different ideas, they will stop you. They have already closed two threads about the Parham, and banned a 1900 who plays it. As long as I stay low rated, they probably won't notice me, and I should be safe from ban.
Iam german, i have to know what facism means...dont try to teach me in history!
You're the one who said you didn't understand what I was talking about, I apologize.
The_Gavinator wrote:
You're the one who said you didn't understand what I was talking about, I apologize.
OK apologize accepted!
I also told you above that i only play sidelines with a rating above 1900 and i was not banned till now...whats your opinion about that?
Well the thing is that you don't share it. I thought since the Parham is a good opening, and I'm a generoud person, I'd like to share it with you people. All we have recieved are a bunch of trolls, locks, and bans. Truly a shame this hapens to good people.
The_Gavinator wrote:
Well the thing is that you don't share it. I thought since the Parham is a good opening, and I'm a generoud person, I'd like to share it with you people. All we have recieved are a bunch of trolls, locks, and bans. Truly a shame this hapens to good people.
Yes, its generous from you to share your knowledge about your favorite opening and i think some people, including me, were a little bit too harsh with you, but i think the main facts are stated about the parham. Everything else will lead to an endless discussion.
Compare the discussion about the Parham with the story of the BDG. People are arguing since decades about this gambit and there is still no final result in this discussion.
Jun 8, 2012
0
#387
Can you guys tell me what happens to the Lunatics in History.
I know the answer I want to know if you see it within yourselves.
They wind up as heads of state.
Jun 8, 2012
0
#389
no only the one's with power/Charisma do. The rest of them end up in the loonyvilles where inevetably someone will give them a lombotamy and save the rest of the worlds sanity.
since Gavinator and whatup have niether as do most parham advocates. except Bernard Parham (who though he looks like Gadaffi[which is NOT a good thing], does not spoon feed his hippy patzer BS to the rest of the world no matter how good he is. because he is only a rank amature with a performance rating in the 1800's hardly Master quality chess.) I say commit them to the insane asylum or get out of the rest of our faces.
They don't lobotomize people any more. But lunatics are still in charge.
Jun 8, 2012
0
#391
yeah cuz they have power/charisma which most (fortunately) don't
and I realize that they don't do that anymore. It was a joke. also it rarly did anything other than turn them into a vegitable. anyway maybe they need to. oh wait they don't do that anymore (I think) (electroshock). what do they do feed them a bunch of drugs and make them sleep and only feed them when they wake or some thing along those lines.
That is some kind of paragraph.
Sungolian wrote:
jetfighter13 wrote:
no only the one's with power/Charisma do. The rest of them end up in the loonyvilles where inevetably someone will give them a lombotamy and save the rest of the worlds sanity.
since Gavinator and whatup have niether as do most parham advocates. except Bernard Parham (who though he looks like Gadaffi[which is NOT a good thing], does not spoon feed his hippy patzer BS to the rest of the world no matter how good he is. because he is only a rank amature with a performance rating in the 1800's hardly Master quality chess.) I say commit them to the insane asylum or get out of the rest of our faces.
Bernard Parham plays like a 1900 now because he's old and tired. Most strong players lose rating points when they turn old because they have trouble concentrating and such. When Parham was in his prime like 15 years ago, he played at 2200+ level which is why he was awarded the life master title. He used the Parham Attack successfully in big tournaments like the U.S. Open.
He wasn't awarded the life master title, was he? As far as I can tell the highest title Parham achieved was National master.
whats the highest title youve been awarded?
Title 4, although I have 3 title 3 norms and 1 title 2 norm. And I've only played chess for 6 months, not enough time to get many norms. It's supposed to take 5 years for 40% of people at a rating level to get that title.
Also, didn't you claim my blitz was 1499 when you were accusing me of cheating Gavinator. Sadly the post was deleted so I can't quote it, but that was when I was trying out openings that were worse than the parham, such as 1. h4 (just for fun, unlike you guys I don't believe these openings are sound). Now, after just a few days of playing actual blitz chess, my rating is already above 1600.
Sungolian wrote:
Dark_Falcon wrote:
The_Gavinator wrote:
I don't know how old you are, but in a government, or history class, or something like that, you will learn about Facism. That is similar to communism, but everybody must "worship" their leader. So chess.com makes it so that everybody must only play mainline opneings, and if they try to have different ideas, they will stop you. They have already closed two threads about the Parham, and banned a 1900 who plays it. As long as I stay low rated, they probably won't notice me, and I should be safe from ban.
Sorry Mate, but thats completely nonsens...i only play sideline openings, dubious gambits and other stuff, my rating is above 1900 and you see iam still here...no one will be ever be banned for playing bad openings...
The difference between you and me is, that i dont try to convince anyone, that the Englund Gambit is the Holy Grail, thats what you are trying to do the whole day with your Parham-stuff. Its annoying!!!
Talking to much bull.... and spamming threads with ideas nobody wants to know can also lead to a ban.
They closed two important Parham-Threads? OK...48 Parham-Thread are still open.
So if Chess.com is such an evil monster, why are you still there?
There are many other options for a guy like you.
But i dont want to destroy your conspiracy theories.
By the way...look at my profile, there you can see my age...
You won't get banned because you have a paid membership. whatupyodog had only a free account. that's why he got banned.
That makes sense...so Gavi has to pay a few bucks and then he can show us his real strength without having fear of getting banned...
Sungolian wrote:
jetfighter13 wrote:
no only the one's with power/Charisma do. The rest of them end up in the loonyvilles where inevetably someone will give them a lombotamy and save the rest of the worlds sanity.
since Gavinator and whatup have niether as do most parham advocates. except Bernard Parham (who though he looks like Gadaffi[which is NOT a good thing], does not spoon feed his hippy patzer BS to the rest of the world no matter how good he is. because he is only a rank amature with a performance rating in the 1800's hardly Master quality chess.) I say commit them to the insane asylum or get out of the rest of our faces.
Bernard Parham plays like a 1900 now because he's old and tired. Most strong players lose rating points when they turn old because they have trouble concentrating and such. When Parham was in his prime like 15 years ago, he played at 2200+ level which is why he was awarded the life master title. He used the Parham Attack successfully in big tournaments like the U.S. Open.
2200??? That is nothing... Even at that level, openings are not a huge factor... It needs to be tested at the highest level.
Sungolian wrote:
shepi13 wrote:
Sungolian wrote:
jetfighter13 wrote:
no only the one's with power/Charisma do. The rest of them end up in the loonyvilles where inevetably someone will give them a lombotamy and save the rest of the worlds sanity.
since Gavinator and whatup have niether as do most parham advocates. except Bernard Parham (who though he looks like Gadaffi[which is NOT a good thing], does not spoon feed his hippy patzer BS to the rest of the world no matter how good he is. because he is only a rank amature with a performance rating in the 1800's hardly Master quality chess.) I say commit them to the insane asylum or get out of the rest of our faces.
Bernard Parham plays like a 1900 now because he's old and tired. Most strong players lose rating points when they turn old because they have trouble concentrating and such. When Parham was in his prime like 15 years ago, he played at 2200+ level which is why he was awarded the life master title. He used the Parham Attack successfully in big tournaments like the U.S. Open.
He wasn't awarded the life master title, was he? As far as I can tell the highest title Parham achieved was National master.
He' a life master. The USCF changed their policy so that anyone who ever obtained an official non-provisional published rating of >2200 to keep the title of master for life regardless of future performances. So by that definition Parham is always a master.
I do realize he's not in top form anymore, but it doesn't detract from his past accomplishments when he performed for many years at >2200 during his prime.
What is the point of all that ? Even if he had reached 3000+ is wouldn't mean the Parham is a great opening. Plenty of good players tried bad stuff (do you seriously believe Fisher's 3...d6 refutes the king's gambit ? - it's not bad, but not a wonder either), and reversely some great stuff was played first by patzers (such as Evans' gambit, played by Evans the patzer and then by many strong players for a century).
And oh yes, the Parham is not refuted by now, but neither is 1.a3 or 1.f3 (whichever you find worse).