I have no idea what Firebrand will (or can) do. I refer to myself as a class A player because I am. You called Aersly an expert and I corrected you. Aersly is an active class B player.
The beauty of a woman (or man) is in the "eye of the beholder". A 1700+ player is a class B player in everyones eyes.
I am not sure why you brought Aersley into this. Factually he, like Firebrand, peaked OTB as a 1700+ player 2 years ago.
What is misleading is you, and he, referring to him as an expert. Chess.com's ratings don't count.
I will break 2000 on chess.com as soon as any of my current games are concluded, but that does not make me an expert.
Engines on, Firebrand is as good as they come. But we have seen that even 1300's OTB can come close to that level of success.
I have on many occassions complimented Firebrand for his ability to produce top notch analysis. All the while he offers disdain to the Ponziani. "A wasted white". I dont get upset about that, because it appears to be true.
Kant
I do not get upset when Firebrand often disdains the Ponziani.
However, who are you to say such and such a rating "don't count" [talking about Earsley now]
And how do you know what his over the board playing strength would be now? The answer is you don't. You were just downgrading him because I called him an expert. He is of expert strength and I know this from playing him in person and also by viewing his games and watching him play his games.
I have first hand knowledge and all you have is an old rating that you choose. [and of course you choose a rating 2 years ago which is not indictative of his current playing ability] You do this often and there is no real point to it.
I'm a Class C player, as anyone can clearly see from my Chess960 rating.
Also, the Queens Gambit 1. d4 d5 2. c4 is a better opening than the Ponziani [in fact it is rated #1 as far as results]
The English Opening 1. c4 is also better than the Ponziani
Also 1. Nf3 is better per results
Also Ruy Lopez 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc3 3. Bb5 is slightly better than the Ponziani per results.
While Firebrand is correct it is not fair and it is mocking [mocking my words] to evaluate his chess ability on an old rating when he was in the process of improving
--I do not agree with his statement that his only choices [in the exhibition game] were to deviate on move 4 or 5 or 12. I don't disagree either but think there may be other options.
Someone could say look at that poor Dave Taylor, ponz, he has had a USCF rating of 2188 for 40 years but could not make USCF master. However my performance rating for my last 16 games was approximately 2370. I chose not to continue in USCF over-the-board. Later, had opportunity as I played a 6 game match with a master who won the Chicago Open with a perfect score and the 6 game match ended in a tie but we chose not to rate it.
[and I may be wrong but I think the average ratings were lower 40 years ago.] It is just not fair to look up some prior rating from years past and declare that is someone's current ratings or ability. [it is also not cool]
Firebrand I am not sure as I need to analyze more but I am not sure you are right when you say the only non-force move for White was 12. Qd5 in terms of not technically being worse-to-losing.
I am not saying you are wrong it is just that I am looking at some analysis and if it bears any fruit I will tell you.
I have a question for you. Is there a Black line vs the Ruy Lopez which appears to give White no advantage at all or even maybe drawing as similar to the Frasers line here? [to answer my own words-there has to be as all sound chess openings are draws--but I am asking per your experience]
Ponz, I think Marshall Attack is a line which white rather avoid in the Ruy Lopez as this per current theory it is a draw.
It is less forcing than Fraser but white must withstand dangerous initiative and play very accurately because their queenside is completely undeveloped and white king falls under strong pressure.
This is why white developed various anti-Marshall lines which are much more frequently played than 8.c3. It is even than if black wants to play a normal closed RL he would rather choose the accurate move order (7...d6 instead of 7...O-O) to avoid anti-Marshall which some players mastered very well and made a strong weapon.
Unfortunately for Ponziani players there seem to be no strong anti-Fraser lines - but maybe they exist and wait to be discovered?
Another very drawish and at the same time really quiet line against RL is Berlin defence. White actively seeks ways to get advantage but black seems to find good resources against each new try. Thus white frequently choose the quiet 4.d3 to avoid the queenswap line. Though as some previous posts mentioned the move d3 is much more playable in RL than in Ponziani because the light squared bishop does not get blocked by own pawns.
I have seen a number of games in database which went 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.c3 Nf6 4.Bb5 - could this be a way to avoid Fraser and get playable positions after 3...Nf6 or that move is flawed as in 3...d5 line?
We have an established rating system. I can factually state that you retired from over OTB chess at 2198 (albeit you did not receive rating points that you deserved), and from correspondence chess at 2500+. Anything anyone adds to that is pure speculation. My OTB peaked at 1893, I feel like I am playing better chess now than ever before. I even beat a master in a skittles game. When I went to my last tournament I lost rating points.
Here is a reason chees.com's ratings dont count: sometimes I offer or accept challenges to practice specific opening (Ponziani, Pirc, Smith-Morra). You don't get that luxury OTB. You also do not get to resarch your opening OTB. Further, (using me as an example) my library consists of 4 chess books, other people may have none/many. The point is on chess.com there is no leveled playing field.
In my opinion, chess.com'sratings don't count, and neither does speculation.
dzikus Thank you very much for your constructive comments. I was thinking the Marshall must lead to an even game and that is why White often tries to avoid it.
In the end all sound openings may have fairly good drawing lines as after all any sound opening or any chess game will end in a draw with perfect play on both sides.
Certainly, in my opinion White should not play the very early d3 line for several reasons.
I looked at 3. c3 Nf6 4. Bb5 in the past and Black can get an edge by playing 4. Bb5 Nxe4 as per my sequence of moves
It is my opinion/guess that the last word is still out on the Fraser.
It is not as easy as it may seem. However it is just an opinion or a guess until I can prove it.
I have played thousands of Ponziani games and never ran into the ingenius Fraser so while it may cause some super players to be afraid to play the Ponziani--this is not true for 90% of all players [90% is a very conservative estimate as I mean below master strength] Learning the Fraser [and especially if White can find some very long lines] may not be worth it for many experts and even masters. Heck I still get miniatures off of masters because they have never really studied the Ponziani.
Look at the Blackmar Diemer which has been refuted [not refuted as a draw but refuted as it should lose] It is ranked #10 in the ten best openings--why? because if you do not know the defense [or defenses] White gets a nice attack and players of this opening know how to play the White side.
the BDG hasn't been refuted i'm quite certain.
Assault you may be right but I rememver seeing some refutations on chess.com. A lost depends on the move order. For example
That last statement should read "but I remember seeing some "said to be refutations" on chess.com. A lot depends of the move order. For example:
Being up 24 or more hours at a time does not help my speling or wrting.
Another line might be worth analysing (if you have not done that yet)
Note that I am biased by Ruy Lopez so I look for similar structures. Maybe the regular Ponziani player is not familiar with playing against the Open Spanish but this way of treating 3...Nf6 is interesting in my opinion
I used to play the Open Spanish. I will look at your suggestions. Suggestions are always welcome.
dzikus
Certainly your lines here are better than the 3. c3 Nf6 4. d4 Nxe4
5. Bb5 lines as there is some semblance to the Open Ruy and White often keeps his White squared bishop. So, it could be an alternative unless someone with a good chess engine or a centaur finds a refutation.
So something to look into...
accurate remarks can very well be an attack. For example you can look up someone's chess rating in some forum--mine for example and then you could say I only have a bullet rating of 1600 + [or whatever it is] and you could accurately quote that rating and I have never played bullet chess on chess.com or anywhere.
Or you can look up an old rating and ignore a new rating and tell everybody that so and so has the old rating. I remember you calling Earsley a class B player as one example. This is misleading and some get upset when you do this.
If you see a rather ugly lady and go up to her and tell her she is ugly--you are being accurate but it would also be an attack.
Also, since you have made remarks about Firebrand do you really think he wants to play a chess game with you?