Defences to the Parham Attack

  • #581

    I am but a noob.

  • #582
    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.

  • #583
    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?

  • #584

    You know that JF meant a lone bishop cannot FORCE mate, while a rook is sufficient. 

  • #585

    "it takes two bishop's assisted to mate"

    Jetfighter is just freakin dumb. I think he might be the same person as Christiansoldier.

  • #586

    Yes I know that, what does that have to do with anything? Stop trolling me bro

  • #587

    You really struggle to remain rational don't you Gavin? I'm amazed we're trying to have discussion with some kid that calls himself the gavinator obsessed with a Gadaffi look alike who reckons vectors have a use in chess. Enlighten us how does black force mate below?

  • #588

    No I showed what he said, jetfighter is just stupid.

  • #589

    They can't, how dumb are you.

  • #590
    The_Gavinator wrote:

    They can't, how dumb are you.

    If they can't wtf is wrong with jetfighers statement. 

  • #591
    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.

    No it doesn't.

  • #592

    I know, but 1 bishop can give mate too.

  • #593

    You fail to understand the game of chess is not a cooperative affair. The mate you showed earlier cannot be forced. Therefore, jetfighters statement that two bishops in cooperation with a king are needed to force mate is completely valid.  

  • #594

    He never said force now did he?

  • #595
    The_Gavinator wrote:
    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?

    no the situation that I refered to was below

  • #596

    You never mentioned the word force, and there is no mate there period. Stop trolling.

  • #597

    Ok you are the one trolling because you don't know general chess termonology. when I say a Bishop and King cannot mate without extra help I mean against a lone king where as a rook can do that with a king. its simple endgame termonology that you don't know because you never get there. either because you loose. win because of your elaborate trap. or just plain don't care to play one.

  • #598

    I wish I had admin control. I'd retitle this thread, "Gavinator is a troll" making sure that is by Gavinator, giving his apology along with a lengthy, why the Parham is inept. Then I'd lock it.

  • #599

    I don't think the value of pieces has much to do with how easy it is to mate the king with them.

  • #600

    well calling a rook equal to a bishop is looney. therefore Gavinator Parham and anyone who agree's with them are loons. Dive back underwater why doncha

or Join

Online Now