Learning 1.e4 e5 thoroughly - Chess Forums - Page 9

Garrett84

Feb 12, 2015

0

#161

Hi chicken monster,

Can you view my previous games? I am fairly new to the site, and i dont know if i need to change my settings. If you can, play through my last 2 games I played as white. 1 I won, 1 i lost. I won because he hung a piece and the game was pretty easy after that. The one I lost, I hung a pawn with double check and went from an equal position to losing.

The moral of the story: don't hang material... or you won't have material.

This is my current strategy to improve my chess; dont hang pieces, play actively in the center, consider and evaluate my opponent' s threats, and activate my passive pieces. As opposed to increasing my fund of knowledge about opening lines.

Chess is a great game. Unlike poker or backgammon, we have a rating system that measures relative strength. If someone is +/- 100 points of me, they probably make the same mistakes I do, as evidenced by the games I played and referenced. It is my opinion, that my current strategy has the best return on investment (time and energy). I attribute my improvement by paying special attention to these details.

Ziryab

Feb 12, 2015

0

#162

XPLAYERJX wrote:

The both of you believe people had no influence over line's that are named after them and you call me unintelligible?

If you do not understand what I am saying it is becuase you both probably do not play the Ruy Lopez or don't have a clue what your talking about.

My agruement is very logical and make's perfect sense

You need an English class. Your spelling, grammar, syntax, and sentence structure all need work.

Some of your errors are consistent. You only occasionally make a proper plural. Most of the time you use an apostrophe.

You misspell argument with regularity, too.

Your thoughts may well be logical, but they are not logically expressed.

You would have written thought's.

I play the Spanish as White and as Black.

VeeDeeVee

Feb 12, 2015

0

#163

Ziryab wrote:

XPLAYERJX wrote:

The both of you believe people had no influence over line's that are named after them and you call me unintelligible?

If you do not understand what I am saying it is becuase you both probably do not play the Ruy Lopez or don't have a clue what your talking about.

My agruement is very logical and make's perfect sense

You need an English class. Your spelling, grammar, syntax, and sentence structure all need work.

Some of your errors are consistent. You only occasionally make a proper plural. Most of the time you use an apostrophe.

You misspell argument with regularity, too.

Your thoughts may well be logical, but they are not logically expressed.

You would have written thought's.

Dyslexia.............?

Ziryab

Feb 12, 2015

0

#164

VeeDeeVee wrote:

Dyslexia.............?

Not likely. His errors lack the characteristic pattern of that disorder. It is more likely that he dropped out of school after sixth grade. His errors are characteristic of someone with that level of education.

Chicken_Monster

Feb 12, 2015

0

#165

Garrett84 just sent you a message. Easier than dealing with all the garbage in this thread.

Garrett84

Feb 12, 2015

0

#166

Wow, talk about a red herring argument. This is devolving quickly. I post with my smartphone, most of the time. I would not want my education level, IQ, or my moral charecter to be assesed on my posts and typos.

Ziryab wrote:

VeeDeeVee wrote:

Dyslexia.............?

Not likely. His errors lack the characteristic pattern of that disorder. It is more likely that he dropped out of school after sixth grade. His errors are characteristic of someone with that level of education.

aggressivesociopath

Feb 12, 2015

0

#167

Chicken_Monster wrote:

When defending 1.e4 with 1...e5, what do folks think of the following paradigm?

Ruy Lopez (OK Spanish ...whatever you wan't to call it. Rodriguez Looney. I don't care.)

Going with something not overly ambitious but perhaps very sound...such as, for example the Closed Ruy Lopez Chigorin.

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3 O-O 8. c3 d6 9. h3 Na5 10. Bc2 c5 11. d4 Qc7

Then if White plays 12.a4, 12.d5, 12.b4, or the main line 12.Nbd2

Black has several potential responses. One may respond with Petrosian sub-variation 12...Bd7

Other common responses could be

12...Be6, ...Rd8, ...Re8, or ...Bb7...not sure why Bd7 is better or worse than the others, or if any of you folks can shed some light on it...

would there be an advantage of one over the other, and why?

Would the Berlin be better that the above, and why? I don't have a deep understanding of all of this yet obviously, but I will eventually.

If you feel this is being overly ambitious, then perhaps we can dumb it down.

Other options? Berlin Wall trading Queens?

You left opening the c file with 12...cxd4 and provoking White into closing the center with 12...Nc6 off the list. 12...Be6 also tries to provoke White into closing the center at the cost of a tempo. 12...Be6 13. d5 Bd7 is 12...Bd7 13. d5 with White to move. 12...Bb7 also provokes White into closing the center and Black usually follows it up with 13...Bc8 to boot.

So you can (1) try to maintain the tension with 12...Bd7 or the rook moves; (2) close the center with a loss of tempo; or (3) open the c file for your queen and try to use the file for counterplay (or at least use the file to avoid getting crushed on both wings like in Karpov-Unzicker and Geller-Mecking).

If you are not using a book, 12...Be6 seems to be popular in high level play at the moment. So, it should be easier to find learning material.

Ziryab

Feb 12, 2015

0

#168

Garrett84 wrote:

Wow, talk about a red herring argument. This is devolving quickly. I post with my smartphone, most of the time. I would not want my education level, IQ, or my moral charecter to be assesed on my posts and typos.

Occasional misspellings are typos. Using an apostrophe to form a plural 97% of the time stems from not knowing basic English.

Ziryab

Feb 12, 2015

0

#169

I.A. Horowitz, Chess Openings: Theory and Practice does a very good job of explaining the key ideas in the Spanish. He calls it the Ruy Lopez, of course, because that was the norm in English speaking countries in the 1960s.

The book was published more than 50 years ago, so it will not have the latest trends. But it will help build the foundation that you seek.

aggressivesociopath

Feb 12, 2015

0

#170

All this talk about English forces me to rewrite everything two or three times to catch all my little mistakes. Considering that I couldn't be bothered to organize my thoughts into separate sentences in the first place, this is quite an accomplishment.

NM TheOldReb

Feb 12, 2015

0

#171

Such mistakes in English must really be annoying for any English teachers that may be here ! Something that bothers me is the misuse of : their , they're and there , also similar misuse of your , you're and I'm not even a teacher ...

Garrett84

Feb 12, 2015

0

#172

Horowitz is great for advanced beginners and intermediate players. I have his Chess Traps: Pitfalls and Swindles and I am working through it. I will buy your recommendation.

But I still think you are overly harsh on missspelings and apostrophes' s uses. Hahaha - I couldn't help myself.

Ziryab wrote:

I.A. Horowitz, Chess Openings: Theory and Practice does a very good job of explaining the key ideas in the Spanish. He calls it the Ruy Lopez, of course, because that was the norm in English speaking countries in the 1960s.

The book was published more than 50 years ago, so it will not have the latest trends. But it will help build the foundation that you seek.

NM TheOldReb

Feb 12, 2015

0

#173

That old Horowitz book might be hard to get these days ... good luck ! I have it and like it though it is dated ...

Garrett84

Feb 12, 2015

0

#174

Searching Ebay and Amazon as I type.

Reb wrote:

That old Horowitz book might be hard to get these days ... good luck ! I have it and like it though it is dated ...

Ziryab

Feb 12, 2015

0

#175

aggressivesociopath wrote:

All this talk about English forces me to rewrite everything two or three times to catch all my little mistakes. Considering that I couldn't be bothered to organize my thoughts into separate sentences in the first place, this is quite an accomplishment.

All this talk about English can become tiresome. However, in the case of XPLAYERJX, it appears that he might have something useful to say about chess if only he could learn to communicate clearly.

His misunderstanding both of history and of what those contributing history to this thread have said may require more work.

Chicken_Monster

Feb 12, 2015

0

#176

Thanks all, for those suggestions.

Robert_New_Alekhine

Feb 12, 2015

0

#177

jlconn wrote:

Already planning to switch to the Caro-Kann in a month? And then what are you going to spend a month not learning after that?

You must mean "very casual familiarity with" when you say "understanding of".

What if you don't understand the open games by month's end? Have you ever noticed how 3rd grade pretty much repeats 50% of second grade, then fourth grade repeats 60% of 3rd grade, etc, until finally in college you spend half your time taking courses that cover less than you've already learned in high school? Do you know why all of that inefficiency happens in modern education? It's because instead of scheduling things naturally, according to actual outcomes, they use time as a basis.

How about instead of planning to study the Caro-Kann next month, you plan to tackle it whenever you've actually accomplished whatever goal it is that you have for the open games?

If you really want understanding of the open games, you will have to spend a lot of time playing them in slow games against stronger players, making the effort to calculate variations, struggling and suffering through the bad positions that you'll see a lot of after your inevitable errors. After fifty games played like that, you will be at the beginning of understanding. Just reading a book won't give you understanding. As good as Fine's Ideas Behind the Chess Openings is, and as true as its words are, you won't understand it until you've internalized it, and you can only do that by trying to apply the ideas, and then seeing where you failed, discovering why you failed, and then repeating, trying not to fail the same ways again. After all that, if you stick to it long enough to develop an inuitive feeling for what a good move or a bad move looks like, then you can say that you understand the open games - at least as far as your current ability level allows.

You are not focusing on the topic of this forum. This Chicken wants a book reccomendation on 1.e4 e5.

Robert_New_Alekhine

Feb 12, 2015

0

#178

Ziryab wrote:

XPLAYERJX wrote:

The both of you believe people had no influence over line's that are named after them and you call me unintelligible?

If you do not understand what I am saying it is becuase you both probably do not play the Ruy Lopez or don't have a clue what your talking about.

My agruement is very logical and make's perfect sense

You need an English class. Your spelling, grammar, syntax, and sentence structure all need work.

Some of your errors are consistent. You only occasionally make a proper plural. Most of the time you use an apostrophe.

You misspell argument with regularity, too.

Your thoughts may well be logical, but they are not logically expressed.

You would have written thought's.

I play the Spanish as White and as Black.

He is nine. Period.

Robert_New_Alekhine

Feb 12, 2015

0

#179

Ziryab wrote:

aggressivesociopath wrote:

All this talk about English forces me to rewrite everything two or three times to catch all my little mistakes. Considering that I couldn't be bothered to organize my thoughts into separate sentences in the first place, this is quite an accomplishment.

All this talk about English can become tiresome. However, in the case of XPLAYERJX, it appears that he might have something useful to say about chess if only he could learn to communicate clearly.

His misunderstanding both of history and of what those contributing history to this thread have said may require more work.

I believe this is all of topic.

You should meet The_Goalkeeper. e's an 'pert 't doing what I 'm doing righ' now.

Chicken_Monster

Feb 12, 2015

0

#180

I don't understand why people feel the need to belittle others and make personal attacks. It must stem from insecurity or unhappiness.

Please stop. XPLAYA is highly intelligent and adept at playing chess and at explaining the concepts very clearly. Actually, he has a gift for teaching. He has contributed at lot more to this site than most. Why do you care if he makes a spelling mistake? I knew a PhD in physics smarter than any of you, and he could not spell more than a four letter word. He has a genius-level IQ.

XPLAYA can take an abstruse subject and make immediately clear to me. If you are unhappy with your own life, don't take it out on others online. You are only embarassing yourselves with these comments.