Ponziani Opening

It is too early to tell how the group is doing now but I am sure they wil do fine. I think a somewhat high rated player may be helping with their vote chess now. 

FM Bluebird left after you did.

I did not know that.

Bolan, there was always only one Super Admin and that Super Admin was DJ.  He too a brief leave from the team and left Ponz as the sole Super Admin.  Ponz then made Law the only Super Admin.  DJ, the founder of the group, returned and took the reins of Super Admin.  Every Vote chess game, tournament, forum navigation, and instructive video, was the work of DJ.

It seems Bluebird only wanted to analyze, so he is a perfect fit for the new non-playing group.

Timothy, you will likely not be admitted in the analysis group because you do not fit their criteria (neither do I)

I am glad Ponz took my suggestion to form a group for the purpose he is currently interested in.

Kant you have some of the facts wrong. I never took your suggestion as the group for analysis was formed before I left Ponziani Power.  Also you are wrong when you imply that I am only interested in the the analysis only group. As you know I was and am very interested in Vote Chess.

It is also wrong to say that every vote chess game and instructive video was the work of DJ. I helped with the instructive video.  Also there were many players who helped with the vote chess.

It is true that DJ left the group and put me into the role at super administrator but what you are not mentioning is that he put me in that position without even telling me in advance and then he told everybody not to contact him. We found a super to take my place [I did not want to be super] and then all of a sudden DJ came back and demoted the then super and told me that we had "not done anything" while he was gone and he was going to rescue us [in so many words]  I disagree we had done nothing  We had challenged and beat some of the very best teams in vote chess is one example.  Also I added a whole lot to forums. Analysis of completed vote chess games, a host of Ponziani miniatures,  games played by strong chess engines using the Ponziani Opening and more.

Also you have no right to say what Bluebird wanted or did not want. You have a habit of doing this. Also you have no right to say what I want or do not want as simply you are almost always wrong on this.

I may be wrong on this but I think maybe in the past there were two supers--this last I am not sure...

Bluebird stated that he joined the group to analyze the Ponziani with you, so when you left he left.  You did not see the comment because you were already gone.

There were 2 Supers just as an overlap.

DJ as a fact did start all of the Vote chess games.  Just as a fact you were most responsible for the victories (and defeat).

I have no intention of going back and forth with you here.  I wish you well with your analysis group.

How did you think of the Ponziani opening?

Lol, Ponz did not invent the Ponziani.  It invented him.

i thought he named it but i just searched at google and it is from the 1490s i think...

He's old, but not that old.

Kant, you still have no right to say why Bluebird did things or why I do or did things.  You have a habit of doing this and with me it was constantly saying I did things out of bad intentions.

DJ as super did start all the vote chess games that is not at all the same as your statement that he was responsible for all the vote chess games.

Obviously the players playing the games had something to do with it.

The Ponziani opening is hundreds of years old.  However theory from the past is often no longer valid.

It is my opinion that in a Vote Chess Group there should be room and accomodations both the serious Vote chess players and for the players who are not so interested in vote chess but want to do fun things such as in house tournaments.

Will this thread be the new place for you to gripe, or will be a thread about the opening?

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.c3 d5 4.Qa4 Nf6 5.Nxe5 Bd6 6.Nxc6 bxc6 7.d3 O-O 8.Be2 Qe7 planning 9...Bg4. Discuss.

Personally I think 8.Nbd2 is more accurate planning to meet 8...Qe7 with 9.g3 but even there Black has interesting compensation based on the a5 push. Ideas?

Sorry, I havent checked this thread lately. Have you discussed 7. d4 yet? Fritz 13 says its slightly better than d3.

but if your looking at d3...

9. Nd2 is the best move according to fritz 13 followed by 9...Re8 10 0-0 Bf5 11 Re1 dxe4 and so on...

I think 7.d4 is an error and did you put in 9...Bg4 as a move?

After 9...Bg4 it says f3 is the best move. 10. f3 Bd7 11 0-0 Nh5 12 g3 Bxg3 13 hxg3 Nxg3 14 Re1 then it gets complicated...

Why do you think d4 is an error?

My mistake I did'nt let it analyse long enough before d4.

It said Re8 gave white an advantage but I don't have time to analyse it right now. I'll do it later, if I have time.