b3 isn't a waste of time against the other systems though. against every other system it is fine, just not mine.
therefore, i think Bronstein , Rubinstein , Capablanca , Shlechter, Nimzowitch,Alekhine played b3 only when their opponent didn't use this sytem. for example d4 d5 nf3 c5, those legends would already opt for something like dxc or c4.
Let's see...................hmmmm............found something.
Who is the coach that teaches endgames and recommends Colle and London? I know none.
I don't have negative view for Colle and London.On the contrary , I like them a lot .But they are not right for beginners.
So you know no well known coach that recomends Colle or London but you accuse me that my arguments "doesn't really stand up".
Yes , you convinced me.Something must be terribly wrong with me.
Why I trust Nezhmetdinov and Botvinnik and not your non well known coaches is beyond any comprehension.
Interesting!
Also I'd like to point out that since I don't know well known coaches, I also don't know any well known coaches who are against teaching the London/Colle to beginners!
Again you accuse me for "flawed logic" while your arguments are anything but logical.
Do you know any well known coach that is against teaching 1.b4 to beginners?
The fact that YOU don't know any well know coach that is against teaching 1.b4 to beginners,clearly means that it's ok to teach 1.b4 to beginners.
Is that a "non-flawed logic" according to you?
Well, I found Colle immensely helpful at the stage I'm at. I was a lousy player (still not much good tbh) before I saw this thread, started using just the bare bones and suddenly I found much better development.
OK so I still lose to 920s sometimes because I make some dreadful errors, but I've beaten 1260s, which I wouldn't have done before.
Well, I found Colle immensely helpful at the stage I'm at. I was a lousy player (still not much good tbh) before I saw this thread, started using just the bare bones and suddenly I found much better development.
OK so I still lose to 920s sometimes because I make some dreadful errors, but I've beaten 1260s, which I wouldn't have done before.
Yes , exactly that is the point.With Colle you hide your mistakes , you don't correct them.You are actually the same player you are going to "pay" for it sooner or later.In chess you always give something back when you take something.
My advise is forget the easy wins and keep losing.It may be tough but ultimately you are going to be happy you did it.
what? the zukertort?
you kiddin' me?
d4 d5 nf3 c5!? and for some reason no one dares to take on c5 or play c4.
nf3 nc6 b3(since they only know one system) cxd4 is the way i play against the zukertort colle-ers.
well, then again, most people don't play like me as black.
The way you always play against Colles is to hope they illegally play Nf3 twice?
Every book I've seen on the Colle recommends either 4.dxc5 and a kind of reversed QGA/Noteboom for white (Palliser, Summerscale) or 4.c4 and transposition to a Tarrasch or a really favorable QGA (Rudel, Jussupow).
The Colle isn't inherently weak because you only face patzers who adhere to it too strictly. Every opening is bad if you try to force it when your opponent doesn't cooperate. But your line not only doesn't refute it...against prepared players, it scores better for white than the mainlines.
Most club players just set up that same pawn structure anyway since they are trying to avoid theory. It gets tedious in live chess playing against that same dull setup every single time d4 comes. It's like playing the same game over and over again...
I have to mix things up with 1...d6 or 1...g6 because they will play the same game 2000 times and still not get bored of it. I just cannot deal with unimaginative play like that.
It is true that most play it exactly the same way every time but it is actually a system that can be played with many ways.Of course it doesn't work against 1...d6 or 1...g6 but against 1...d5 is considered by many the second best ,after Queen's Gambit of course.
Who is the coach that teaches endgames and recommends Colle and London? I know none.
I don't have negative view for Colle and London.On the contrary , I like them a lot .But they are not right for beginners.
What are your qualifications? Are you a master? (No.) Do you teach for a living? (No.) Have you ever had more than a dozen students at the same time? (Of course not.) Have you ever won any awards for your writing? (No.) Do you have any clue of what you are really talking about? (Probably not.)
Well, I found Colle immensely helpful at the stage I'm at. I was a lousy player (still not much good tbh) before I saw this thread, started using just the bare bones and suddenly I found much better development.
OK so I still lose to 920s sometimes because I make some dreadful errors, but I've beaten 1260s, which I wouldn't have done before.
Thank you! And just one good case in point, I am sure there are hundreds more who have never even spoke up.
woah. Don't show off so much there like you always do. It doesn't do too much for your personality.
Agreed. It's always a rather unattractive and distasteful sight when the person most ardently impressed with one's own minor achievements is oneself. Even if those minor achievements were relevant to the point at hand - which they're not - it's still a pretty poor show. And I wonder how his students feel at seeing their teacher continually berating people who are not masters and are not teachers (i.e. people just like his students) as obviously having nothing worthwhile to say on the subject of chess.
And the less said about the "I'm sure most of the people who haven't responded agree with me" defense, the better.
Who is the coach that teaches endgames and recommends Colle and London? I know none.
I don't have negative view for Colle and London.On the contrary , I like them a lot .But they are not right for beginners.
What are your qualifications? Are you a master? (No.) Do you teach for a living? (No.) Have you ever had more than a dozen students at the same time? (Of course not.) Have you ever won any awards for your writing? (No.) Do you have any clue of what you are really talking about? (Probably not.)
Actually I am a candidate master and when I stopped I had 2200 FIDE rating(do you ever had 2200?)and I was 2 times Greek champion under 20(team championship U20) but I don't like to show off like you(lol , yes I know I just did).The problem though is not what I am or what I am not.You don't answer to what I say and it is obvious that you only participated in the discussion to find more "students" , meaning more money.
I understand that there is a whole new "market" of "customers" out there that don't have the patience for a long term study plan and they "demand" immediate results for their money.So guys like you , self-assigned teachers , and they get paid to teach Colle(frankly, I would do the same if I could).Of course Colle is the easy solution for every beginners.He can play 10-15 safe moves and reach a playable position even against a grandmaster.That gives them the false impression that they have improved while actually they are the same.
By "teaching" something similar like Colle(only much better) I manage to make a player increase his rating by 600 points in 9 months(he increased 300 points in the first 2 months!!!).But here comes the difficult part.The fact that he refused to follow a more correct and long term "study program" has now it's consequences.Against better opponents things are not so easy anymore and his lack of understanding now "kicks in" in every game.It may sound weird but while his rating increased by 600 points his understanding is only slightly higher.
So I know Mr "qualified and awarded teacher" what you do to find your students and I know how you earn your money.I don't have a problem with that , I wish you to be rich(if you aren't already) , but my problem is that you try to mislead and misinform everyone by claiming that you do the right thing because you want to find more students like the poor blackrabbitto who now thinks that he does the right thing and he is a better player(he will realise later, I hope not too late, his mistake).
Of course there are guys out there that can teach , unfortunately though only 1/10 of those claiming that are teachers can actually teach.
Your "credentials" and your "awards" don't impress me ,use them on your customers.
Of course, I'm not trying to say his achievements as an NM is good or bad.
Just in case my post seemed like i was degrading the NM title.
Sure, but that's only one of them. Thousands and thousands of people teach for a living, that's nothing special. As for having more than a dozen students at a time, any high school teacher in the developed world would have more, and most of them are hardly considered leading experts in their fields.
For the NM title itself, sure, it shows a decent chess ability, better than mine, for instance. But it's not even as high as some of the people he's arguing with on this very forum.
Just saying, this level of achievement, while not insignificant, is not as impressive as he seems to think it is, and certainly not sufficient to attempt to settle disputes by simply appealing to one's own authority.
Who is the coach that teaches endgames and recommends Colle and London? I know none.
I don't have negative view for Colle and London.On the contrary , I like them a lot .But they are not right for beginners.
What are your qualifications? Are you a master? (No.) Do you teach for a living? (No.) Have you ever had more than a dozen students at the same time? (Of course not.) Have you ever won any awards for your writing? (No.) Do you have any clue of what you are really talking about? (Probably not.)
Actually I am a candidate master and when I stopped I had 2200 FIDE rating(do you ever had 2200?)and I was 2 times Greek champion under 20(team championship U20) but I don't like to show off like you(lol , yes I know I just did).The problem though is not what I am or what I am not.You don't answer to what I say and it is obvious that you only participated in the discussion to find more "students" , meaning more money.
I understand that there is a whole new "market" of "customers" out there that don't have the patience for a long term study plan and they "demand" immediate results for their money.So guys like you , self-assigned teachers , and they get paid to teach Colle(frankly, I would do the same if I could).Of course Colle is the easy solution for every beginners.He can play 10-15 safe moves and reach a playable position even against a grandmaster.That gives them the false impression that they have improved while actually they are the same.
By "teaching" something similar like Colle(only much better) I manage to make a player increase his rating by 600 points in 9 months(he increased 300 points in the first 2 months!!!).But here comes the difficult part.The fact that he refused to follow a more correct and long term "study program" has now it's consequences.Against better opponents things are not so easy anymore and his lack of understanding now "kicks in" in every game.It may sound weird but while his rating increased by 600 points his understanding is only slightly higher.
So I know Mr "qualified and awarded teacher" what you do to find your students and I know how you earn your money.I don't have a problem with that , I wish you to be rich(if you aren't already) , but my problem is that you try to mislead and misinform everyone by claiming that you do the right thing because you want to find more students like the poor blackrabbitto who now thinks that he does the right thing and he is a better player(he will realise later, I hope not too late, his mistake).
Of course there are guys out there that can teach , unfortunately though only 1/10 of those claiming that are teachers can actually teach.
Your "credentials" and your "awards" don't impress me ,use them on your customers.
Why so desperate to compare yourself to someone you pretend not to care about? Smells fishy. Like you got something to hide.
You a alias of his? You can't follow that simple logic, ain't no way you can play chess.
He only joined today...
New or alias?
"You ain't nothin. I ain't wastin no time comparin myself to you. Now here's 2000 words where I compare myself to you, just to show you I'm better."
That don't reek of desperation for validation, nothin do.
"You ain't nothin. I ain't wastin no time comparin myself to you. Now here's 2000 words where I compare myself to you, just to show you I'm better."
That don't reek of desperation for validation, nothin do.
You obviously are from another planet.I never said to anyone "you ain't nothing".I said your teaching method is wrong(read my posts first). I discuss with everyone, and not only with those that are masters, because I don't have the arrogance to believe I am something special.The way I see it , we are all students and that will never change.It was the "awarded teacher trainer and master" that used his "credentials" to prove that he is right.A "National Master" is not the "Pope of chess".Personally I would disagree even with Kasparov if he said something I believed was wrong .It is possible of course(more likely certain) that Kasparov would be right and I would be wrong but he had to prove that with logical arguments and not say "I am Kasparov , I am right to everything".
I had the chance to discuss with quite a lot of very good players.I disagreed with them , I even doubted some of their moves or opening choices in some cases but no one told me "I am a Grandmaster , I am right".In chess no matter how good or how bad you are , if you say something that is correct , it is correct, period.
In the next game a "fool" uses Rubinstei attack to win another "fool" in just 28 moves.