"I'm assuming he played g6." - The only possible way to lose to the parham other than scholars mate is to play 2...g6. I'm even amazed the player who played 2...Bd6 in the database lost.
Defences to the Parham Attack
Sort:
Shepi- Did you forget Ke7?
shepi13 wrote:
That's the variation that leads to a slightly better ending that I wantyouto refute. I doubt YOU can.
That means you know that it's refuted, but you doubt I can because of my rating or something stupid like that.
Alright, I doubt You can. I doubt IM Pfren can. I doubt Whatupyodog can. I doubt Alexlaw can. I doubt Joeydvivre can. I doubt Anyone can refute this relatively forced line. BETTER?
Lol what line are you even talking about?
(15...Be6 Rybka 2.3.2a mp 32-bit -0.34 (depth 13) 16.Qe3 c6 17.Nxf6+ Qxf6 18.Qd3 Qh6 19.Rd1 f5 20.exf5 Bxf5 21.Qxd6 Qxd6 22.Rxd6 Bxc2)
The variation shown in my game with whatupyodog.
o.o,
Did someone hack The_Gavinator's account or something? I went on his profile earlier today and it said Bernard Parham, now it says Benjamin Dover????? Really confused here....
Which database? I have yet to find a database with more than a few hundred? What I find humerous, is that in chess365, when you get to the mailnine (5. Ne2), scores something like 42% wins, 23% draws, and 35% loss, which is actually similar to the spread of most mainline openings.
And Trapper, I like to change it up from time to time, keep it fresh.
Trapper, Gavinator is not Parham, he is simply a person stealing identity. The real Parham was a lot more patient, and he wasn't a 1300.
Shepi, in your board, move 10 should be exd5.
Rubidium, please stop trolling unless you're going to contribute lines.
Yeah, I like to change my name every once in a while. Just like Parham switch his name back and forth constantly.
Please leave chess.com
shepi13 wrote:
(15...Be6 Rybka 2.3.2a mp 32-bit -0.34 (depth 13) 16.Qe3 c6 17.Nxf6+ Qxf6 18.Qd3 Qh6 19.Rd1 f5 20.exf5 Bxf5 21.Qxd6 Qxd6 22.Rxd6 Bxc2)
The variation shown in my game with whatupyodog.
That's why I don't play correspondnece, you have a bunch of wusses like that who feel the need to engine.
joeydvivre wrote:
I claim that Black is very good above. IM pfren objected to my characterizing this as "at least equal for Black" claiming that Black has a sizable advantage and posting an angine evaluation of the position as very favorable for black. If this is the best you can get from the Parham, as WHITE, then the Parham is completetly, utterly busted.
I am not a strong player but was wondering if 2...Qf6 is a reasonable response to the Parham. Maybe someone could explain why/why not. Any comment appreciated. Thanks!
ChristianSoldier007 wrote:
it violates the same principles that Qh5 does... although gavinator himself lost as white in that variation
Okay, what principles? (not that I disagree, but I can definitely learn something from your comments). thanks again.
Christian soldier, I lost to it once in a 3 minute game, I think that hardly counts.
whatupyodog2-5 wrote:
Please, do not listen to ChristianSoldier he just bashes the parham for no reason, Qf6 is probably best instead of Nf6 on move 4.
that helps - thank you
I don't think there is one, I said that if you can't refute my line then my line does refute the parham. As far as I can tell black is simply winning at that point.