MATRIX CHESS

This is a pretty freaking funny thread to read. I've played Bernard Parham a few times now and his "matrix chess" theory is pretty solid. I'm not a grandmaster by any means but I am a pretty solid player. I've used the matrix system a couple times almost always with success it is a lot more than just moving your queen out early.

You got it! I do indeed have a life (which school is very quicky robbing me of). I could probably set you up in a game vs Parham if you'd like. It wouldn't be one of these 3 days per move games tho, maybe half hour or 15 min or something?

Message me directly that way chess.com notifys me via email.

Thanks.

I would love to watch this game. When do you guys plan to play it? Could you post the day and time here when you know.

I do not know anything about "Matrix Chess" and will not pretend to. Personally, I am a bit skeptical about pulling your Queen out so early. But the idea of using Geometry to determine board patterns actually seems very plausible to me. I am not sure that using triangles and pound symbol patterns makes a difference- personally I would prefer to use the marshmallows from lucky charms cereal. But the idea of incorporating geometry into one's analysis does not seem weird to me at all if done correctly (I am using geometry in a very general-abstract sense. I don't mean pick your opening using Area=Pi*r^2). I would imagine that all players use geometry in their analysis to a degree- what interests me is using it in a very direct way.

I will have to check this person's site out.

I'm game gambit. It's really not my style I'm just saying that it is effective and worth taking a look at.

i have no reason to decline the gambit, i just wanted to decline it to see where it would lead to. You do have an advantage right now... don't let it slip away :)

I was debating a couple of moves at move 9, and I think that was definitely the turning point of the game. I definitely had a cramped position there, maybe Nc3 as a possibility? any suggestions? 

I ran the computer analysis on this game, it said I had a slight advantage through the first three moves, but I made a equalizing mistake moving the pawn up on move 4, and then further down the line I should have take the undefended pawn on g7. (with my queen) But that was only to hold on to a drawish position. I am not a fan of this opening being called "matrix" chess it is silly sounding, all you are doing is evaluating the board, and calling it something else. Anyways, like I said, I played it consistently for maybe 6-9 months as my main opening as white. It would catch some people off guard and I had some pretty cool wins with it, but I think I agree with everyone on this board that it is very tough to get a good position out of it and you are fighting for a draw a lot of times when black is ready and prepared for this kind of opening. Anyways, I like your style of play gambitking very, interesting and exciting to play against. Completely contrary to what I have switched to as white playing predominantly queens gambit :) 

Howdy to all! 
I played Mr Parham yesterday in the US Senior's tournament.  I played the London System, he the matrix system.  It is a unique system, no early Queen attacks, no crazy moves, just a steady system of countering the potiential of the London.  We talked for a couple of hours afterwards.  He has switched to a new type of diabits medication which enables him to play longer games and is testing his system in this tournament.  

Although the system is very different, it sounds ok when he explains how it works--he, like all of us, is susceptible to human failing in judgement of chess positions but I was impressed in our game... my highest rating (30 some years ago) was 2169, now an A player who just had my floor reduced to 1800 due to age and mistakes which I make during games.  

Give the man his dues and watch the Senior's event to see how see does as the Tournament progresses--he is 2-0 now... 

Paul Covington
PaulsChessMarch.com  bloging my quest to play chess in all 50 states! 

Back in the early 90's in scholastic chess in Indiana I had the opportunity to play against a number of Matrix players as well as witness a number of games using this system.  I believe it works well in a scholastic setting and even online because the depth of chess theory and knowledge is quite low in both of these settings.  My particular school had a coach who focused on strong theory and chess analysis and as a result were normally quite able to destroy players employing this system.  

As players using this system improve their overall chess game they also improve their playing aptitude. This results in them playing solid chess better even if they do play the Matrix.  For instance, a player who has 100 OTB games under their belt is more likely to find deep tactics then the player in his first tourney.  That being said, I am strong believer that solid sound positional play is a good way to engage against this system.  You probably do not want to be drawn into typical Matrix lines of play which offer extremely tactical positions your opponent may be very familiar with. 

I do not mean this with any disrespect towards either Bernard Parham or his son - they are both fine chess players and true gentlemen based on my own personal interactions.

Somebody knows how many points do knights cost in matrix system?

Can someone help me out please ? http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/can-someone-explain-the-quotmatrix-systemquot-better-for-me

Intriguing.

I was wondering if there is anyway to learn this system if I am not living in Indiana?

Otherwise, did Mr. Bernard write any books on it that can help me?

Thank you!

I have done some research on this and would like to understand other than playing this queen move and getting into some line, what is Matrix chess? and what is different about it (matrix over the board chess) than regular chess. Is there a book one can get that teaches it?

anyone who runs across this thread just check out his losses vs win raation on all modes its clearly not worth playing 

I had the honor to meet and play him in the 2013 US Senior tournament....  (he won)....  then, spent an hour and a half explaining his system and answering my questions. I asked why he was playing so much  above his rating? He said he had just changed his diabetes meds and could play without his system crashing for entire games...  I believe his rating would have been higher without the diabetes... He played very strong, winning until he got up to the 2300 plus players and extra long games. 

The "system" is good for strong tactical players and does teach countering the moves that your opponent makes, when there are no tactics on the board. Mainly, it is just a different way to think about and evaluate chess positions. Race forward to alpha-zero, another way to think about and evaluate chess...  I am NOT saying the two are compatible, just different ways to think about chess....