Honestly other than for shock and suprise, why would anyone play this let alone take it seriously. Even Schiller looks on it with disdain in his Unorthodox Chess Openings. IDK why but to each his own. I just figure White does not like his woman too much and I have no problem putting her in the harem
Defences to the Parham Attack
Sort:
vengence69 wrote:
Honestly other than for shock and suprise, why would anyone play this let alone take it seriously. Even Schiller looks on it with disdain in his Unorthodox Chess Openings. IDK why but to each his own. I just figure White does not like his woman too much and I have no problem putting her in the harem
Maybe he likes em wayward...?
nameno1had wrote:
vengence69 wrote:
Honestly other than for shock and suprise, why would anyone play this let alone take it seriously. Even Schiller looks on it with disdain in his Unorthodox Chess Openings. IDK why but to each his own. I just figure White does not like his woman too much and I have no problem putting her in the harem
Maybe he likes em wayward...?
Perhaps so. As for the point count on Knights, would you agree that barring an additional pawn added to 2 Knights to be able to have a chance at mate (hence 2.4 x 2= 4.8 +1= 5.8 pts [Compare to a Rook being 5 pts and capable of mate with the King assisting]) and say 2 Bishops @ 2.6 pts apiece, for 5.2 pts [again capable of mate with King assisting], does this make sense? I am unsure if either FIDE or USCF concur but logic would seem to dictate this to be possible. Your thoughts?
@ChristianSoldier007:
I have heard that as well. However (though obviously not on point with the thread, merely a curiosity of mine), it would seem that the values attributed would perhaps start near 3 points from opening and middlegame (since there are several support pieces then), as this material disappears it would seem interestingly that the superior force with a King and 2 Knights would be at less than 5 pts count (given that this ending is always drawing due to insufficient material yet the addition of 1 pawn affords mate, albiet with extremely precise play. I attributed the overall mating combinations of a Q, a R, a N+B or 2 B's will mate if the King assists.
As i said, it is not on point but simply an observation given that this idea behind the Parham seems to have taken its logical course.
PS: I really like the name (To God alone be the Glory). Thanks for not hiding your light under a bushel.
Jun 13, 2012
0
#566
hey vengence I figured out the knights tour already it is so simple once you see the paterns.
Knights and Bishop's are 2 points, who said 3.5?
AdvLegitimate wrote:
ChristianSoldier007 wrote:
dont really understand your post but if its reletive to point value some peoploe say knights are three and bishops are 3.5
who says that?
If your really feel that bishops are better it'd only be 3.25 since the bishop pair is apparently worth half a pawn
If the saying had much truth Gelfand would have smashed Anand in the Championship.
Jun 13, 2012
0
#569
maybe they are in looneyville Gavinator. the problem with this logic is that in Matrix chess Rooks are also worth two and this is completely false. the reason is it takes two bishop's assisted to mate where as it takes only one rook assisted to mate.
jetfighter13 wrote:
maybe they are in looneyville Gavinator. the problem with this logic is that in Matrix chess Rooks are also worth two and this is completely false. the reason is it takes two bishop's assisted to mate where as it takes only one rook assisted to mate.
This guy (Parham) got to an master level putting all pieces except the queen on 2 points?
The Parham attack must be devastating.
Jun 13, 2012
0
#571
@post 839 lol playing for an endgame are we.
all of these are logical moves and everything gives white an advantage.
CHCL wrote:
I'd prefer 4. Nxe4 but whatever floats your boat.
White doesn't have an initiative if he plays 4.Nxe4.
Nevermind, missed the pawn fork.
I am but a noob.
joeydvivre wrote:
Yeah 4. Nxe4 is instant equality. 5 ...Be7 is instant equality and none of the sharp stuff in this opening (This is Frankenstein-Dracula mainline). I am currently on the white side of a FD in a Vote Chess game that we are losing. Bummer.
I didn't realize that it was the Frankenstein-Dracula. Wow.
jetfighter13 wrote:
maybe they are in looneyville Gavinator. the problem with this logic is that in Matrix chess Rooks are also worth two and this is completely false. the reason is it takes two bishop's assisted to mate where as it takes only one rook assisted to mate.
It does?
You know that JF meant a lone bishop cannot FORCE mate, while a rook is sufficient.
http://www.chess.com/home/view_message.html?id=412982052
This is the decline Gavinator sent me...see for yourselves. He doesn't want to prove anything,except that he wants to run his "trap"...
I think I will just keep reprinting this every 5 posts or so...