If there is a "main line" of this rubbish, it's supposed to go like that:
As far as I am concerned, Black is dead lost after 11.c4!
Everybody is welcome to prove the opposite...
Might as well add that 10...Qd7 also runs into c4, while Qb4 runs into Nd2. Otherwise, definitely busted.
Well, your average player might be afraid of moves like Bh3 or Be4. Of course these are easily defended against.
OK since Black threatened the c2 pawn c4 seems reasonable, but maybe Na3 is slightly better or even Nc3 letting black have another pawn but getting the last minor piece out is justified.
Na3 would make Tarrasch somewhat uneasy in his grave. Nc3 is reasonable, but why not hit Black's only positional pride, the d5 pawn?
Black has absolutely no threats- both Bh3 and Be4 are easily countered, taking the c4 pawn with ...Bd3 lets Black hopelessly exposed, and Bc2 is easily answered by Qd2.
The best Black can hope of is saving a pawn-down (and positionally inferior) middlegame, which seems unlikely against rational play.
Wat ever reason i prefer colorado gambit.. If u want to c the variation which u feel that is inferior please check through youtube type key word gJ_chess in search box. I studied this opening through that videos and practiced in live games i got wonderful result ... I always plays Nimzowich and u will c all lines explored in that videos there are more than 10 videos series regarding that and tell me its good r bad.... if u still want more lines then check with engines..My rating was only 1500+ after studying that i becaame 1800+ in chess.com ...
Wat ever reason i prefer colorado gambit.. If u want to c the variation which u feel that is inferior please check through youtube type key word gJ_chess in search box. I studied this opening through that videos and practiced in live games i got wonderful result ... I always plays Nimzowich and u will c all lines explored in that videos there are more than 10 videos series regarding that and tell me its good r bad.... if u still want more lines then check with engines..My rating was only 1500+ after studying that i becaame 1800+ in chess.com ...
Congratulations on the rating boost. That doesn't make the opening any better, though. In particular, unless I missed something when I skimmed those videos (didn't want to waste too much time with them), he avoids the critical line after 7.0-0, and even suggests that the only two good moves after 7...Nd7 are 8.Bf4 and 8.f4?!, completely ignoring 8.Bxc6! in his analysis.
Well I count seven pawns for each side at the moment, with each side having a pawn en prise at the moment.
Komodo 8 on my rather ancient computer likes c4 most but gives white only a slight advantage. I would far rather be white here for sure.
There might be a problem with your computer/engine/both of them. Same engine here in an average 4-core AMD goes around +1.05 after 3 minutes, and gradually goes up. Oh, and 4 moves after 11.c4 white does have a pawn more- or not?
Add to that the well-known fact that in many positions, the engine evaluations are not a gospel. A recent example from a game I played (white to play):
After 10 minutes thought, Komodo 8 evaluates this as a slight white advantage (+ 0.44). The truth is close to that: Black's position is completely resignable.
If there is a "main line" of this rubbish, it's supposed to go like that:
As far as I am concerned, Black is dead lost after 11.c4!
Everybody is welcome to prove the opposite...
If aww_rats was brave enough, he would argue with that. I still remember the debate you had with Mr. Richards about a year ago. I even have it bookmarked for safe keeping http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/nimzowitschs-defense-answer-to-d4-d5-nc3?page=5
If there is a "main line" of this rubbish, it's supposed to go like that:
As far as I am concerned, Black is dead lost after 11.c4!
Everybody is welcome to prove the opposite...
If aww_rats was brave enough, he would argue with that. I still remember the debate you had with Mr. Richards about a year ago. I even have it bookmarked for safe keeping http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/nimzowitschs-defense-answer-to-d4-d5-nc3?page=5
Mr. Richards has suggested there the "improvement" 10...Qd7, which in reality is even worse.
I have no problem with clueless people in general, but I get really annoyed when these people try to SELL their cluelessness as ultimate wisdom.
If there is a "main line" of this rubbish, it's supposed to go like that:
As far as I am concerned, Black is dead lost after 11.c4!
Everybody is welcome to prove the opposite...
If aww_rats was brave enough, he would argue with that. I still remember the debate you had with Mr. Richards about a year ago. I even have it bookmarked for safe keeping http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/nimzowitschs-defense-answer-to-d4-d5-nc3?page=5
Mr. Richards has suggested there the "improvement" 10...Qd7, which in reality is even worse.
I have no problem with clueless people in general, but I get really annoyed when these people try to SELL their cluelessness as ultimate wisdom.
You should try re-reading your comments on the King's gambit then??
What's up with the king's gambit? Everyone knows it's rubbish- the main problem with it is that it is high quality rubbish, and Black has some trouble proving a non-symbolic advantage. Or, as Nigel Short said, "The thing is, you know, the King's Gambit is really a lousy opening, and you've really got to be in the mood for it".
What's up with the king's gambit? Everyone knows it's rubbish- the main problem with it is that it is high quality rubbish, and Black has some trouble proving a non-symbolic advantage. Or, as Nigel Short said, "The thing is, you know, the King's Gambit is really a lousy opening, and you've really got to be in the mood for it".
Lets see....I know, lets quote you:
"I have no problem with clueless people in general, but I get really annoyed when these people try to SELL their cluelessness as ultimate wisdom"
I rest ones case.
If there is a "main line" of this rubbish, it's supposed to go like that:
As far as I am concerned, Black is dead lost after 11.c4!
Everybody is welcome to prove the opposite...