Forums

French Defense: Paulsen Variation (I need some help)

Sort:
Yereslov
Yereslov
Aug 14, 2012
0
#21
SpiritofGalviyodog wrote:

you're no different than my former beings on chess.com. you keep posting weak stuff, claim you're a very strong player, use computer analysis incorrectly, give diagrams and yet, your rating hasn't passed 1400.

btw your latest 'database'-you should clearly know why the 'statistics' about g6 are ...bad.

I never said 5...g6 was good.



Yereslov
Yereslov
Aug 14, 2012
0
#22
Estragon wrote:
Yereslov wrote:
Estragon wrote:

It's a joke line.  Black plays 5...Ne7 and he is fine.  Here, the pawn is pretty clearly poison.

Why don't you try that against some 2400-2600 FIDE rated player. 

It's definitely a weakness.

My 152k database of recent games since 2007 has over 9600 Frenches, and only 5 where a 2400 player plays 5 g4 - no examples of a 2500+ playing it, so it would apparently be difficult to achieve your challenge.

Using database stats from online playing sites proves you know as little about statistics as you evidently know about chess.

Actually, I know more about chess than the average person, just no so much about openings.

chesspooljuly13
chesspooljuly13
Aug 14, 2012
0
#23

The average person doesn't play chess, so I believe you're correct, yereslov ol' bean

Yereslov
Yereslov
Aug 14, 2012
0
#24
chesspooljuly13 wrote:

The average person doesn't play chess, so I believe you're correct, yereslov ol' bean

I meant the average chess player.

Context...

pfren
IM pfren
Show your flair!
Aug 14, 2012
0
#25

Here is the simple refutation of Watson's suggested line. Watson does mention 11...Bd7, but quite ironically not the very natural and strong 12...0-0-0.

Vitiugov stops after 11...Bd7 saying "a single glance at the development of both sides speaks volumes about the value of this variation".

 



chesspooljuly13
chesspooljuly13
Aug 14, 2012
0
#26
Yereslov wrote:
chesspooljuly13 wrote:

The average person doesn't play chess, so I believe you're correct, yereslov ol' bean

I meant the average chess player.

Context...

"Context" doesn't excuse expressing yourself poorly, yereslov ol' bean. You know better than that

Yereslov
Yereslov
Aug 15, 2012
0
#27
pfren wrote:

Here is the simple refutation of Watson's suggested line. Watson does mention 11...Bd7, but quite ironically not the very natural and strong 12...0-0-0.

Vitiugov stops after 11...Bd7 saying "a single glance at the development of both sides speaks volumes about the value of this variation".

 

 



How is this a refutation? White played an awful game.

pfren
IM pfren
Show your flair!
Aug 15, 2012
0
#28
Yereslov wrote:
How is this a refutation? White played an awful game.

I am sure you can play better than that- yes?

Please show us... because to my poor understanding, after 8.Qxh7 all white's moves  are forced (unless he silently admits at move 12 that he is worse, and tries to get out of his mess with 12.Ne2 cb2+ 13.ab4 Qa1 14.Nc3).

Yereslov
Yereslov
Aug 15, 2012
0
#29
pfren wrote:
Yereslov wrote:
How is this a refutation? White played an awful game.

I am sure you can play better than that- yes?

Please show us... because to my poor understanding, after 8.Qxh7 all white's moves  are forced (unless he silently admits at move 12 that he is worse, and tries to get out of his mess with 12.Ne2 cb2+ 13.ab4 Qa1 14.Nc3).

I never said I could player better, but this is not a refutation of the Moscow Variation.

It's just a poorly played game from white.

Plus, 6.dxc5 is not a move I would ever make.

pfren
IM pfren
Show your flair!
Aug 15, 2012
0
#30
Yereslov wrote:
Plus, 6.dxc5 is not a move I would ever make.

I am not surprised: 6.dc5 is the only consistent move for white (6.Nf3 cd4 and 6.a3 Qa5).

Yereslov
Yereslov
Aug 18, 2012
0
#31
pfren wrote:
Yereslov wrote:
Plus, 6.dxc5 is not a move I would ever make.

I am not surprised: 6.dc5 is the only consistent move for white (6.Nf3 cd4 and 6.a3 Qa5).

Did you make a typo?

The main reason why black was able to launch an attack and win was because of 6. dxc5.

Why in the world would you give up the center?

Yereslov
Yereslov
Aug 18, 2012
0
#32

I can't find anything that claims that taking the pawn is a good thing, so I'm not sure where this claim comes from.

waffllemaster
waffllemaster
Aug 18, 2012
0
#33
pfren wrote:
Yereslov wrote:

The Wonderful Winawer reccomends 5. Qg4.

It provides plenty of analysis to support the opening.

In that case, there must be your reading issues.

Moskalenko does not mention 5...g6 at all, of course, but instead gives 5...Ne7, and resumes that this variation can only frighten "weak players, or kids". I believe you belong to both categories, so it scares you to death.

Regards.

Laughing

Yereslov
Yereslov
Aug 20, 2012
0
#34
Powerlevel_9001 wrote:

Holy crap, yereslov got pwned in this thread!

Not really, since Pfren can't provide any evidence.

pfren
IM pfren
Show your flair!
Aug 20, 2012
0
#35

I do not have to provide any evidence of your stupidity. Your comments more than suffice.

Azanama
Azanama
Closed: Inactive
Aug 20, 2012
0
#36

OMG Ne7 IS the sideline!!! g6 is horrible!

Yereslov
Yereslov
Aug 20, 2012
0
#37
pfren wrote:

I do not have to provide any evidence of your stupidity. Your comments more than suffice.

When you make a wild claim, you need evidence.

5...g6 has been played for years with no trouble.

Yereslov
Yereslov
Aug 21, 2012
0
#38
Powerlevel_9001 wrote:

Yes over the years I have seen many many games, too little for my fingers to count, I need evidence yereslov.

What year do you want 1990-2012?

The opening used to be more popular 40-50 years ago, but it's still played at the GM level with no trouble.

It's not refutable.

Yereslov
Yereslov
Aug 31, 2012
0
#39

You can't just troll by being an idiot. 

You need to be a little more refined like me.

DrSpudnik
DrSpudnik
Show your flair!
Sep 17, 2012
0
#40

LOL!!! Laughing