matrix isnt just Qh5, if it was then jean dean, emeory Tate wouldnt become masters.
parham attack
Sort:
I understand it involves forming a vector with the queen and a supporting piece?
alexlaw wrote:
there is nothing wrong with e4 d5 e5 bf5 g4 for NM level.
Oh no, nothing wrong. It just shows he does not understand chess.
2.e5 is just suspect, and 3.g4 is just silly. Other than that, yeah, it's NM level chess.
what are the moves for this strategy?
Huh? The game Zatonskih- Kats is totally irrelevant. It was a Catalan Ukrainian variation (by transposition), where Black was simply not booked (9...b6 is known to give Black a good game).
Maybe you are referring to some other game?
Yes, he does have a plan: weakening his kingside for nothing. Great plan, really.
it amazes me to see more people downgrade someone who one they havent played, but good note to see someone leave a comment about playing parham and losing to but learned from it, if it weakens the king side prove your theory
Prove what?
Currently my FIDE rating is just 515 points higher than mr. Parham's, and I have teached a few Grandmasters how to play the game.
Do I have to prove anything at all?
And besides that, the comment went on the comment about another stupid opening idea (the g4 move suggested), not the Parham, which does not weaken the kingside, but turns white to Black as early as move two.
This is sad. Someone needs to just quit chess.
It's funny you'd say that since he's rated higher than you...
I'd rather be rated 600 and be able to learn then be 2400 and unable to learn anything.
Really? I'd much rather be a FM then be a 600...
Amen. IM Pfren has been incredibly patient by giving variations and for even simply commenting. Gavinator constantly laughed at IM's lines, by giving rotten refutations, but IM Pfren even gave more variations.
But that's not even the point. Gavinator doesn't respect an IM more than he respects a 1200.
Also, TonyH gave advice on deaf ears. This chess coach gave useful advice, but Gavinator and Whatupyodog didn't even reply. This is disgraceful.
whatupyodog2 wrote:
joeydvivre wrote:
Why the heck can't this die?
I think I had been playing chess for 10 years before I even met an IM and many years past that before one decided that I was worthy of their advice. Now we have this IM giving out this advice and 1400 players responding with " it amazes me to see more people downgrade someone who one they havent played ". If Kasparov came on here and told you the Parham was junk, would you believe him? What level of authority does it take?
This internet age has sure made people disrespectful of their betters.
Im at a GM level.
I'm a monkey's uncle.
Not tracking comments anymore.
In that case, you are the first GM ever who's blundering pieces in one move at correspondence chess, and has a negative IQ.
Oh, something like that one:
http://www.chess.com/echess/game.html?id=54026322
Actually your IQ seems being closer to nine below zero than 188. Maybe you meant 0.188 or something?
That's funny you'd say that since he is a chess master...
His best FIDE rating was some 1860, so no, he shouldn't be called "a Master". This rating is low even for candidate master level players.
I have found a game of his in Chessbase which started (Parham was white) 1.e4 d5 2.e5 Bf5 3.g4. I'd rather expect a patzer playing like that, not a "master".