http://www.chess.com/livechess/game?id=824517628
http://www.chess.com/livechess/game?id=829400030
http://www.chess.com/livechess/game?id=829434903
Mystical Borneo's Opening
Sort:
hijodeluna wrote:
And then you'll end up learning something real when you reach good competition. That's my guess, at least.
No, never too late to learn.
Okay, when I played bullet (lightning 1.0) and used a Central Borneo's Opening several time ago, my opponent has made blunders and I have a creative idea (26.Re8) to force a winning position or checkmate as follows:
http://www.chess.com/livechess/game?id=809416306
... Im sorry but these games do not help your cause at all, you won these games because your opponet made blunders not because of the opening.
blasterdragon wrote:
... Im sorry but these games do not help your cause at all, you won these games because your opponet made blunders not because of the opening.
Ok, how about it?
Nice opening!
wow this is a great style of play..constant attack after the pawn sacrifice...
what if ur opponent doesnt want to take ur pawn and develops normally instead?
I think it's legit only because I've seen much weirder that are recognized openings.
Nice opening, I will try it out
That's genius! The Mystical Borneo produces a system in which white's pieces are very effectively coordinated. I'll try it at the club tomorrow. Not convinced that it would work at the top level but I have to congratulate Ronald for coming up with something that is truly original. Thank you Ronald for this (and to chessmaster102 for bumping this thread). Surely the most inventive contribution to opening theory since the great Akiba Rubenstein in 1924 unleashed the Meran on the unsuspecting chess world.
Genius.
Top shelf. Violates almost every opening principle but white gets a huge advantage. Brilliance masquerading as stupidity! I can't wait for this opening to take the chess world by storm.
ex_submariner wrote:
I guess being dogmatic in regards to openings will make you a good player, good luck. Almost any opening can be played with good practical value, this is one.
Top shelf. Violates almost every opening principle but white gets a huge advantage. Brilliance masquerading as stupidity! I can't wait for this opening to take the chess world by storm.
It's an interesting trap, but I can't recommend playing that system. It only works if black cooperates by playing exd3.
In the monkeymaster game, black should play Bg4 instead of taking the d-pawn. If white plays Be2 then black trades bishops and then plays exd3. If white instead plays f3 then black takes the f-pawn, not the d-pawn. Either way, white ends up a pawn down with no compensation.
In lines where Bg4 isn't possible, black can easily equalize (or better) by simply playing e3, giving the pawn back. White has to play fxe3, after which his kingside is weakened and his development looks rather awkward, especially for the dark squared bishop.
It's coffeehouse stuff of course but it looks a lot of fun and I for one hadn't seen it before.
Black: Nd7,Nc5,Bf5,e6,Nf6,Bd6,Qc7,0-0
Black is fine.
Ronald_Aprianto escreveu:
hijodeluna wrote:
And then you'll end up learning something real when you reach good competition. That's my guess, at least.
No, never too late to learn.
Okay, when I played bullet (lightning 1.0) and used a Central Borneo's Opening several time ago, my opponent has made blunders and I have a creative idea (26.Re8) to force a winning position or checkmate as follows:
First, I want to say I really like the opening, it's a very bright trap specially for those who play black agressively in the middle.
Now... I was re-checking step by step all your games, and this game against MonkeyMaster confused me a lot. I saw several apparent "bad moves", both yours and your opponents. Could you explain me the reasoning behind these moves, perhaps I didnt catch it.
1. This is the first game I saw you developing a3-b4-Tb1. What prompted this? In every other game you consistently moved h3 way earlier and always Ne4 after the O-O. The enemy didnt have the fiancheto bishop yet, so why didn't you develop like the other "model" games?
2. At 13. Qf3 c5?!, I can't understand your opponent's mind by moving that pawn. It was a grave mistake, opening you to capture his horse, check and then capture his bishop.
3. After 15. ... O-O, why didn't you move Qf3 again, followed by Qh5, like normal? Instead you do a bunch of useless PxP moves before doing Qf3, like it should have been done before. And you had to move your bishop out and then back again to Bd3 (the initial strong position of your opening). I hate wasted moves.
4. At 23., why didn't you play the obviously superior move Qg4??? You both check the king and threathen to take the bishop in the next move (if he moves his king to h8). His queen can't defend on g5 or g6, If he for some reason moves his queen to g7, then you can Bxe5 and force mate next move.
______
I can only assume, and correct me if I am wrong, that this game against MonkeyMaster was made before you developed and sharpened your very aggressive attack to the King's castle side. Did perhaps this idea "spawned" during this game? It would explain a lot of the inconsistencies, if you were still refining the method.
When I was just starting out in chess, I was barely able to beat people rated 2000+ on this chess site. 2000+! Thats high rated players. With much practice, after about 1000 games of chess with an odd opening/defense knowledge, I was able to reach the mid 1500's quite easily.
I used Central Borneo Opening/Defense whith odd pawn sacrifice on center of board. Please, check out an example as follows:
http://www.chess.com/livechess/game?id=824362826