Why say me jerk? I just try to help.
Openings for black?
Sort:
Jacksparov17 wrote:
Why say me jerk? I just try to help.
Don't worry yourself. He was talking to grass-hopper and myself.
Feb 3, 2014
0
#24
Jacksparov17 wrote:
Why say me jerk? I just try to help.
See message 23 - If you look again at message 20, it targeted the authors of 18 and 19, not you.
Of course, the fact that the author of 18 realized the issue and modified his post while the author of 19 decides to continue to argue BS and be derogatory still towards any Christian says a lot about the difference between these two people, and the complete immaturity of the author of message 19! I'm not even one of those crazy gun-ho religious people to the point where religion takes over me, but I am amongst the millions in the world that fall under the category of "Christian" (raised Catholic, Lutheran now thru marriage, specifically), and you don't hear me calling people out just because they are Jewish, Muslim, Agnostic, etc.
I fully respect those that realize what they did, and attempt to change (i.e. author of message 18). Idiots like the author of message 19 need to go to hell!
[COMMENT DELETED]
Your lack of tact is causing your opinions to be ignored. This is what you fail to understand. You fail to respectfully disagree, you fail to offer anything that isn't anecdotal and you fail the simple task of intelligent debate without allowing your bias to interfere and make things personal. Because of this you cannot expect your opinions to be taken into account regardless of what they are. This isn't science, mathematics or any other complicated subject but common sense. Your opinions are not at question but your poor form is.
Great thread. What was the topic ?? More power to @ThrillerFan.
Play the Modern Defense, or the Hippo, and come back when your rating is higher.
End of Story.
MonkeyingAround wrote:
Unless the only replies that you are interested in are ones like the above you need to put much more effort into your request.
What do you play now?
Which one of your current defences do you want to replace?
What don't you like about your current defence?
What type of defence are you looking for?
Etc...
Anyway, how horrendous is your current opening that it isn't good enough for your current level? I would say that the Englund and Latvian gambits are both fine for you to play.
I believe it is called the scandinavian, but im not sure. here it is
MonkeyingAround wrote:
I'm not calling anybody out because of their religion. I am simply stating facts. Christians are stupid, it isn't possible to believe in such things if you are intelligent. Fact. I couldn't care less if you are religious, keep it to yourself. Your reasoning makes no sense at all though, raised into it? Married into it? Are you high? What have your family member's beliefs got to do with your own? Evolution disproves Christianity and evolution is very easy to prove (well, to be more precise, prove that it isn't possible for evolution not to occur in any group of animals) just using 1st grade maths.
come on what the heck happened to my forum? it's not stupid it's religion. difference.
pfren wrote:
At your level you should not bother about openings, at all.
Are you serious? Bad opening=loss.
zborg wrote:
Great thread. What was the topic ?? More power to @ThrillerFan.
Play the Modern Defense, or the Hippo, and come back when your rating is higher.
End of Story.
Btw I didnt do any of this stuff, some argument happened when the question was what are some good openings for black. my rating is about 300 points lower than yours
MonkeyingAround wrote:
Okay, now I know. You do realise that you are implying that you are victorious, right? Well done, you have achieved victory despite not even attempting to answer my only question. That takes some doing, pat yourself on the back!
P.S. That doesn't work nearly as well with "retards" as it does with "Christians".
Come on nobody wants to hear that, keep it to yourself and thanks for ruining my forum
ChessSlimShady wrote:
pfren wrote:
At your level you should not bother about openings, at all.
Are you serious? Bad opening=loss.
Haha, It doesn't matter. I'm 1500 and I still don't study openings. All you need to know below 1300 is tactics. Once I get to 1700 I will start serious opening prep, but until then I will work on my endgame tactics and positional skills. But back to you. How many of your games are determined by how much theory you know? Probably none. Your games are decided by blunders and better positional knowledge. Openings are a waste of time at your level. Play 1.g3 and you'll be fine.
In a tournament game against a 1900 I played 1.g3 and ended up +4 according to crafty. I lost the game later due to a blunder.
Game: http://www.chess.com/blog/robthepek/2013-owings-mills-scholastic-varsity-section
Study tactics.
I could be wrong but i think that's a dove in post #19 not a pigion.
ChessSlimShady wrote:
pfren wrote:
At your level you should not bother about openings, at all.
Are you serious? Bad opening=loss.
I love openings, but I just have to say - oh please. I've won games with the stupidest openings ever. Yup...
http://www.chess.com/livechess/game?id=711959695
http://www.chess.com/livechess/game?id=568118068
BTW, on the scandanavian, delope the knight at f6 before c6, works better.used to play this opening all the time below 1600 levels.
robthepek wrote:
Haha, It doesn't matter. I'm 1500 and I still don't study openings. All you need to know below 1300 is tactics. Once I get to 1700 I will start serious opening prep, but until then I will work on my endgame tactics and positional skills. But back to you. How many of your games are determined by how much theory you know? Probably none. Your games are decided by blunders and better positional knowledge. Openings are a waste of time at your level. Play 1.g3 and you'll be fine.
I agree with this post until you say play 1.g3. Follow opening principles, strong centre etc.. Even as Black I don't think he should be playing hypermodern openings, as White it is just silly. You're giving Black better than equality on move one, he is now basically White (unless you reply to 1...e5 with c4 and 1...d4 with Nf3).
@einstein - There was a completely different picture there before.
FastCH3SS wrote:
Chess at your level, TACTICS! TACTICS! TACTICS!
Just play e4 as white and e5 as black.
from now on, anyone who says garbage like this should stop giving suggestions because i asked a question and so far about 4 or 5 people have answered it out of like 40 posts. the question wasn't should i play openings at my level? (which is probably higher than yours, check my uscf rating on my profile) it was what openings should i play [at my level] for black. if you people dont understand that openings is where you take advantage, and win, then you dont understand chess. it doesnt matter what level you're at as long as you're rated, and maybe you dont need a certain opening but if you do have a certain opening then you have a better chance. do you win sports games by sucking in the beginning? no, you don't, and if you do then you're just lucky
MonkeyingAround wrote:
pfren wrote:
At your level you should not bother about openings, at all.
I am sick of giving people this advice. It is of course entirely true, but they just get all flustered and defensive, as if you have offended them. Maybe they listen to you more because of your title?
Just going to quote myself. Why not, right? I'm important...
I don't see what is wrong with making derogatory comments towards somebody who gets themselves into holes over arguments that they don't understand, they deserve everything they get. If you are stupid you must know you are and therefore you shouldn't get into arguments with people far more intelligent than yourself, even a stupid person can understand that.