Ponziani opening traps
Sort:
This game is from Titled Tuesday
Gawain Jones vs Fabio Caruana
ponz111 a écrit :
Post #544 Obviously White did not have the book "play the Ponziani" as he made blunders in the opening.
Then Ponz shares this game with analysis :
U can notice that once again, Ponz misread or just modified reality to his advantage.
In my game, I played 7...Bd6 followed by f5, not 7...Nf6 which is quite ok thought. After 7...Nf6 8.Bc4, he failed to give the best reply for black (e4, or c6, or even b5), surprising for such a expert in this variation...
And please Ponz, why giving so many games where black's play is so poor?
I could create myriad of examples (not interesting ones), with blunders, to makes the side i want win.
So what can we conclude? Dishonest? I already stated it but...
IM poucin You are calling me "dishonest"?? Where did you get this idea?
My fast play game was not a critic of your game that you posted. I know in your game you played 7. ...Bd6 followed by 8....f5. So your game posted had little or nothing to do with my fast play game which was a completely different variation.
And yes, I do not give much annotation, if any, on these fast play games--but that does not mean I am "dishonest". These are Ponziani Opening Traps-not some games played by grandmasters.
[Except for the Jones vs Caruana game]
You are "dishonest" in calling me "dishonest".
Aug 19, 2018
0
#511
Oh for gods sake, i thought we pretty much established 3 years ago that this is a bad opening. Why do we have to go through all this again?
if you do not like the opening--don't play it.
Yes, its not the best opening but its surprisingly easy for black to go wrong and this is what this forum/thread is about - NOT proving whether the Ponziani is the best or not. So "poucin" and the others who seem to want to argue for nothing are just wasting their time. Why do they even bother to read this thread if it is so abhorrent to them? If we want to spend time analysing it then that is up to us.
None of the openings I play are considered to be "the best" but i do reasonably well with them presumably because I understand them better than most of my opponents (ie have more books). I guess its similar with the Ponziani - no real threat to black if they know what they are doing but much easier to play for white if they do. Enough said - I didn't want to get into that argument, I just want to enjoy all the quick white wins!
Aug 19, 2018
0
#515
ponz111 wrote:
if you do not like the opening--don't play it.
Indeed i dont like it and i dont play it, thank you very much. :-)
GDring a écrit :
Yes, its not the best opening but its surprisingly easy for black to go wrong and this is what this forum/thread is about - NOT proving whether the Ponziani is the best or not. So "poucin" and the others who seem to want to argue for nothing are just wasting their time. Why do they even bother to read this thread if it is so abhorrent to them? If we want to spend time analysing it then that is up to us.
None of the openings I play are considered to be "the best" but i do reasonably well with them presumably because I understand them better than most of my opponents (ie have more books). I guess its similar with the Ponziani - no real threat to black if they know what they are doing but much easier to play for white if they do. Enough said - I didn't want to get into that argument, I just want to enjoy all the quick white wins!
u must be a student of Ponz with the same pros and cons.
U completely miss my points : I have nothing against Ponziani, a totally reliable choice.
The problem is Ponz : his way to show games is not educational, and his analysis are distorted (which can be normal but as I said, there are some dishonest making and process).
Ponz would say all this is wrong, but i showed facts that are difficult to deny.
Look out for this though.
poucin wrote:
GDring a écrit :
Yes, its not the best opening but its surprisingly easy for black to go wrong and this is what this forum/thread is about - NOT proving whether the Ponziani is the best or not. So "poucin" and the others who seem to want to argue for nothing are just wasting their time. Why do they even bother to read this thread if it is so abhorrent to them? If we want to spend time analysing it then that is up to us.
None of the openings I play are considered to be "the best" but i do reasonably well with them presumably because I understand them better than most of my opponents (ie have more books). I guess its similar with the Ponziani - no real threat to black if they know what they are doing but much easier to play for white if they do. Enough said - I didn't want to get into that argument, I just want to enjoy all the quick white wins!
u must be a student of Ponz with the same pros and cons.
U completely miss my points : I have nothing against Ponziani, a totally reliable choice.
The problem is Ponz : his way to show games is not educational, and his analysis are distorted (which can be normal but as I said, there are some dishonest making and process).
Ponz would say all this is wrong, but i showed facts that are difficult to deny.
As I said before all the games recently have been fast play games and for most they are enjoyable to watch even though I give little or no analysis.
For most--just looking at the games gives an idea of what I am trying to do in those games. Maybe an IM such as poucin does not like to look at those games but then nobody is forcing him to look. For the other 99% it can be enjoyable.
It is not "dishonest" to post a lot of fast play games with little or no annotation. These are Ponziani Opening Traps not some games played by grandmasters.
I think IM poucin is upset as he would not play me in the 4. Bb5 variation of the Ponziani and he posted analysis of the line rather than to play me and I showed his analysis was not correct.
Just ignore them ponz111 and carry on - most of us enjoy your games. If they are such good chess players and don't like this opening then why they keep gatecrashing this thread is beyond me.
