yeserlov I found a game from the 1800's played with the opening. you hardly have a right to name it just like Botnivik didn't but alas Damn Soviets.
My Opening Invention
Sort:
stop feeding the troll people. He just wants attention.
actually, i find his "attention grabbing" quite inspiring. you know what, im gonna invent an opening myself! +1 Yereslov. you rock dude!
so is a troll someone who posts something with sole intention of provoking someone in some way?
also, instead of the caro-kann, how about we call it "the dark shadow of hell" or "satan's black wing"
Jun 9, 2012
0
#27
"Caro-Kann with 3...c5 is stupid. " how is this stupid when is it the 2nd most common move ?
hey could someone please define troll? and be specific. just someone who posts things to get a reaction from people or what? really, I seriously just want to know.
you people give this pfren guy a hardtime. he's just trying to talk some sense into you. here's a game an IM showed me featuring an off-beat line in trompowsky attack that was played at a high level.
and 12 years earlier...
Sungolian wrote:
alexlaw wrote:
that's cos c5 is a new variation, and there are more frenchmen than caromen.
Also, the French is played approx 5:3 times more frequently than the Caro according to most databases I checked (Chessmaster, chess.com, ChessBase, etc.)
This still doesn't explain the 8:1 discrepancy between playing 3...c5 in the French and Caro. It's pretty clear that that move in the Caro is worse than its French counterpart.
There's no real logic there, statistically speaking. You're talking across variations. It's like saying 4...dxB in the Ruy Lopez exchange is better than playing 2...d6 in the Sicilian, because it's played in virtually 100% of Ruy Lopez exchanges, while ...d6 is only played in 33% of Sicilians.
Sometimes, it's just that the position itself makes one move overwhelmingly the most obvious choice. That's ...c5 in the French advance, whereas the case isn't as obvious in the Caro.
I tend to agree that ...Bf5 is the more principled move against the CK advance, but the above argument just doesn't hold water.
A hundred strong GMs once played 1.d4 and lost. Isn't that a blatant proof that 1.e4 is better ?
(I'm not sure if I got Sungolian's logic right, but it sounds like that)
pfren wrote:
Unfortunately I cannot pay you, I have no bananas.
There's a fruit store on our street
It's run by a Greek.
And he keeps good things to eat
But you should hear him speak!
When you ask him anything, he never answers "no".
He just "yes"es you to death,
And as he takes your dough, he tells you...
"Yes! We have no bananas
We have no bananas today...
hushpuckena wrote:
alexlaw wrote:
...i'm one of the few that think french advance is equal but i'm sure the whole world will disagree with me.
Seems to me that the Advance French offers Black equal chances, though I'm sure Trolleslov has his own views on yet another variation he'll undoubtedly claim he originated.
As to this Caro-Kann line, must be he never heard of Mikhail Botvinnik.
Trolleslov... I love colloquialism at its finest...lol....thats funny
-shequan wrote:
hey could someone please define troll? and be specific. just someone who posts things to get a reaction from people or what? really, I seriously just want to know.
I would say it is someone who loves to post in threads to either disrupt( in any manner they can) them because they think its funny or they don't like your topic or you or all of the above. Trolls intentionally, arrogantly treat others in threads in a condescending manner, especially as it pertains to disagreements over various things, regardless if the troll is right or not. If the troll is right, they just want you to feel,bad and look stupid instead of politely approaching you and reasoning with you, so that the intent is that you learn, without you being belittled.
nameno1had wrote:
-shequan wrote:
hey could someone please define troll? and be specific. just someone who posts things to get a reaction from people or what? really, I seriously just want to know.
I would say it is someone who loves to post in threads to either disrupt( in any manner they can) them because they think its funny or they don't like your topic or you or all of the above. Trolls intentionally, arrogantly treat others in threads in a condescending manner, especially as it pertains to disagreements over various things, regardless if the troll is right or not. If the troll is right, they just want you to feel,bad and look stupid instead of politely approaching you and reasoning with you, so that the intent is that you learn, without you being belittled.
I think you're confusing yourself.
We trolls pick out the stupidity in others and make it obvious for the world to see.
You have a choice in raging over the truth or accepting it.
Let's just agree 3...c5 is an inferior move compared to 3...Bf5.
It's about as unsound as the King's Gambit or the Parham Attack.
jeez my science teacher's name is Mr.Parham.
Yereslov wrote:
nameno1had wrote:
-shequan wrote:
hey could someone please define troll? and be specific. just someone who posts things to get a reaction from people or what? really, I seriously just want to know.
I would say it is someone who loves to post in threads to either disrupt( in any manner they can) them because they think its funny or they don't like your topic or you or all of the above. Trolls intentionally, arrogantly treat others in threads in a condescending manner, especially as it pertains to disagreements over various things, regardless if the troll is right or not. If the troll is right, they just want you to feel,bad and look stupid instead of politely approaching you and reasoning with you, so that the intent is that you learn, without you being belittled.
I think you're confusing yourself.
We trolls pick out the stupidity in others and make it obvious for the world to see.
You have a choice in raging over the truth or accepting it.
Let's just agree 3...c5 is an inferior move compared to 3...Bf5.
It's about as unsound as the King's Gambit or the Parham Attack.
yeah, this is rather confusing. given the various times I've seen the word troll invoked. they don't usually seem to be telling truth or showcasing stupidity of others.
AnthonyCG wrote:
alexey_krivega wrote:
jeez my science teacher's name is Mr.Parham.
Run away from this thread! And don't turn back!!!
lol. good advice. I think I will do the same. we need more people like anthony here looking out for the innocent kids.
Yereslov wrote:
nameno1had wrote:
-shequan wrote:
hey could someone please define troll? and be specific. just someone who posts things to get a reaction from people or what? really, I seriously just want to know.
I would say it is someone who loves to post in threads to either disrupt( in any manner they can) them because they think its funny or they don't like your topic or you or all of the above. Trolls intentionally, arrogantly treat others in threads in a condescending manner, especially as it pertains to disagreements over various things, regardless if the troll is right or not. If the troll is right, they just want you to feel,bad and look stupid instead of politely approaching you and reasoning with you, so that the intent is that you learn, without you being belittled.
I think you're confusing yourself.
We trolls pick out the stupidity in others and make it obvious for the world to see.
You have a choice in raging over the truth or accepting it.
Let's just agree 3...c5 is an inferior move compared to 3...Bf5.
It's about as unsound as the King's Gambit or the Parham Attack.
I think they both aren't good lines of play, but make no mistake, I clearly described what you were trying to say, without any confusion. I guess you couldn't understand, some trolls only think they do. If you really want to consider yourself a troll, you should really get better at it first. Same with your opening theory. If you are going to claim relevance as it pertains to either one, you really should study more first.A lot more...
It does use different names than my Chessmaster uses, which I find puzzling. I will assume that both names are valid and its a matter of preference for some reason, as Yereslov is trying to do and get us to follow suit, but without the accolades to pull it off.
The Chessmaster DB is more accurate than the crappy DB they have here. I would go with whatever CM says.
Thanks for that tip. I had been wondering for a while and didn't really feel like trying to figure out the differences beyond the few openings I noticed that have more than one name possibility.