Evans Gambit

Atos, you ask why I always post miniatures (I don't always, but there are a lot of games under 25 moves I post).  The simple answer is that I like to.  It only takes a few minutes and it is fun to go over some trap that was played.  I have collected over 100,000 miniatures in my 40 plus year career (from books, magazines, databases, and my own games) and have written over 30 chess books on chess miniatures.  Your opinion is that you don't think they are very instructive.  I have the opposite opinion.  I think they are the most instructive games to study, play and be familiar with.  I went over your games and you have lost over a dozen miniatures (including a 14 mover) and you have won several dozen more games under 20 moves.  These games are more instructive than your 80 move games full of mistakes.  I've taught several young players who later became masters, and they all started with the fundamentals of recognizing traps in as many openings as possible.  Every master I know has studied traps and miniatures and can recognize the patterns that would lead to a trap, so they know what to avoid.  I read how they programmed Deep Blue, and the first thing they did was program as many traps and miniatures into it so as not to fall for some trap they were unfamiliar with.  Every grandmaster and world champion has fallen for a trap and lost  several games under 20 moves.  I just find long games boring and you cannot possibly remember or repeat them (great for GMs, though).  But a neat chess trap is exciting and you may not forget it and you may even try to play it yourself.  So I guess it is a matter of taste.  Would you prefer me not to post anything at all, or just pick the long ass games that lasted over 90 moves with some rook and pawn ending?  Or only post games between Grandmasters, since all other games are not instructive (what is your definition of instructive) in your opinion?  I have played over a thousand rated tournament games and matches and over 32,000 games in my career, and less than 5% of my games have gone into a theoretical endgame that I needed to study to get a draw or win.  But I have won over 60% of my games in the opening (and lost a few after falling into an opening trap myself), and a large number under 25 moves.  And my games are more likely to be published or added to databases if they were shorter rather than longer (I cannot play a perfect endgame and admit to be a weaker endgame player).  In my opinion, the reason that someone is not a master or strong player is that they are weak in the opening and do not know the traps to avoid or try to play.  I play trappy chess with lots of tactics and risky play, win or lose (I have a very low drawing percentage, perhaps less than 10%).  I just did a random sample of my last 100 live chess games at chess.com, and out of my last 100 games, 70 games were won by me in 25 moves or less.  So you see, most of my opponents fall for some trap in the opening that they could have avoided if they studied miniatures, traps, and short games.  But I have fun and will continue to post miniatures rather than some grandmaster long game that won't be any more instructive than a short game you can learn from.  And nothing is stopping you from posting non-miniatures that you think are instructive.  At age 60, I don't plan to be any International Master or GM, so I'll just play and have fun and hope to catch you or anyone else in a trap and post the miniature if it is an instructive game.  Just don't play 1.g4 e5 2.f3 against me.  I won't know what to do. 

Atos, you ask why I always post miniatures (I don't always, but there are a lot of games under 25 moves I post).  The simple answer is that I like to.  It only takes a few minutes and it is fun to go over some trap that was played.  I have collected over 100,000 miniatures in my 40 plus year career (from books, magazines, databases, and my own games) and have written over 30 chess books on chess miniatures.  Your opinion is that you don't think they are very instructive.  I have the opposite opinion.  I think they are the most instructive games to study, play and be familiar with.  I went over your games and you have lost over a dozen miniatures (including a 14 mover) and you have won several dozen more games under 20 moves.  These games are more instructive than your 80 move games full of mistakes.  I've taught several young players who later became masters, and they all started with the fundamentals of recognizing traps in as many openings as possible.  Every master I know has studied traps and miniatures and can recognize the patterns that would lead to a trap, so they know what to avoid.  I read how they programmed Deep Blue, and the first thing they did was program as many traps and miniatures into it so as not to fall for some trap they were unfamiliar with.  Every grandmaster and world champion has fallen for a trap and lost  several games under 20 moves.  I just find long games boring and you cannot possibly remember or repeat them (great for GMs, though).  But a neat chess trap is exciting and you may not forget it and you may even try to play it yourself.  So I guess it is a matter of taste.  Would you prefer me not to post anything at all, or just pick the long ass games that lasted over 90 moves with some rook and pawn ending?  Or only post games between Grandmasters, since all other games are not instructive (what is your definition of instructive) in your opinion?  I have played over a thousand rated tournament games and matches and over 32,000 games in my career, and less than 5% of my games have gone into a theoretical endgame that I needed to study to get a draw or win.  But I have won over 60% of my games in the opening (and lost a few after falling into an opening trap myself), and a large number under 25 moves.  And my games are more likely to be published or added to databases if they were shorter rather than longer (I cannot play a perfect endgame and admit to be a weaker endgame player).  In my opinion, the reason that someone is not a master or strong player is that they are weak in the opening and do not know the traps to avoid or try to play.  I play trappy chess with lots of tactics and risky play, win or lose (I have a very low drawing percentage, perhaps less than 10%).  I just did a random sample of my last 100 live chess games at chess.com, and out of my last 100 games, 70 games were won by me in 25 moves or less.  So you see, most of my opponents fall for some trap in the opening that they could have avoided if they studied miniatures, traps, and short games.  But I have fun and will continue to post miniatures rather than some grandmaster long game that won't be any more instructive than a short game you can learn from.  And nothing is stopping you from posting non-miniatures that you think are instructive.  At age 60, I don't plan to be any International Master or GM, so I'll just play and have fun and hope to catch you or anyone else in a trap and post the miniature if it is an instructive game.  Just don't play 1.g4 e5 2.f3 against me.  I won't know what to do.