The English attack vs Najdorf siccilian - Chess Forums - Page 3

AngryPuffer

Feb 4, 2024

0

#41

theswooze wrote:

AngryPuffer wrote:

tlay80 wrote:

It appears to be based on one game. Which he won. (No, I didn’t look at the game. But let’s give him the benefit of the doubt.)

i looked at the game. He played well above his rating.

yes. he achieved a 62% accuracy rating in his only game. a wonderful accomplishment.

ive seen 1800s achieve that much accuracy. Does that mean they they are fake and actually 900?

tlay80

Feb 4, 2024

0

#42

theswooze wrote:

tlay80 wrote:

theswooze wrote:

good lord, really? he has a 932 rating after one game because he registered himself as 800. how are you not getting this?

. . . and therefore shouldn't ask questions about openings he's interested in.

Riiiiiiight.

omg! who said he shouldnt ask questions about openings he's interested in? do you have ANY level of reading comprehension?

"dude: your rapid rating is 932. why not just focus on making fewer blunders???"

That's pretty much the definitiion of saying he shouldn't be asking the question he's asking.

Every single other person in this thread has posted something substantive and helpful. Why did you join in again?

AngryPuffer

Feb 4, 2024

0

#43

tlay80 wrote:

theswooze wrote:

tlay80 wrote:

theswooze wrote:

good lord, really? he has a 932 rating after one game because he registered himself as 800. how are you not getting this?

. . . and therefore shouldn't ask questions about openings he's interested in.

Riiiiiiight.

omg! who said he shouldnt ask questions about openings he's interested in? do you have ANY level of reading comprehension?

"dude: your rapid rating is 932. why not just focus on making fewer blunders???"

That's pretty much the definitiion of saying he shouldn't be asking the question he's asking.

Every single other person in this thread has posted something substantive and helpful. Why did you join in again?

Hes likely a socially awkward 14 year old who likes to start a fight online by any means for his amusement and the dopamine rush he gets when he screams at his screen while typing at the same time, thinking hes some smart guy.

AngryPuffer

Feb 4, 2024

0

#44

theswooze wrote:

AngryPuffer wrote:

theswooze wrote:

AngryPuffer wrote:

tlay80 wrote:

It appears to be based on one game. Which he won. (No, I didn’t look at the game. But let’s give him the benefit of the doubt.)

i looked at the game. He played well above his rating.

yes. he achieved a 62% accuracy rating in his only game. a wonderful accomplishment.

ive seen 1800s achieve that much accuracy. Does that mean they they are fake and actually 900?

and i am saying that your analysis that he played 'well above his rating' might not be worth much.

What makes you think that?

That is not what you said or sounded like you were saying. Maybe next time be more clear.

PromisingPawns

Feb 4, 2024

0

#45

The English attack is still strong. If you lose with it that's a you problem.

AngryPuffer

Feb 4, 2024

0

#46

theswooze wrote:

AngryPuffer wrote:

theswooze wrote:

AngryPuffer wrote:

theswooze wrote:

AngryPuffer wrote:

tlay80 wrote:

It appears to be based on one game. Which he won. (No, I didn’t look at the game. But let’s give him the benefit of the doubt.)

i looked at the game. He played well above his rating.

yes. he achieved a 62% accuracy rating in his only game. a wonderful accomplishment.

ive seen 1800s achieve that much accuracy. Does that mean they they are fake and actually 900?

and i am saying that your analysis that he played 'well above his rating' might not be worth much.

What makes you think that?

That is not what you said or sounded like you were saying. Maybe next time be more clear.

what did it sound like i was saying? next time, read with greater comprehension.

You said ¨yes. he achieved a 62% accuracy rating in his only game. a wonderful accomplishment.¨ In this sentence you are being sarcastic and telling me that his 62% accuracy is not a wonderful accomplishment. However, you now claim to be telling me that my analysis is not worth much, which is not what you said the first time and doesn't even relate. Is your first language English? were you not taught in a good school?

AngryPuffer

Feb 4, 2024

0

#47

theswooze wrote:

AngryPuffer wrote:

theswooze wrote:

AngryPuffer wrote:

theswooze wrote:

AngryPuffer wrote:

theswooze wrote:

AngryPuffer wrote:

tlay80 wrote:

It appears to be based on one game. Which he won. (No, I didn’t look at the game. But let’s give him the benefit of the doubt.)

i looked at the game. He played well above his rating.

yes. he achieved a 62% accuracy rating in his only game. a wonderful accomplishment.

ive seen 1800s achieve that much accuracy. Does that mean they they are fake and actually 900?

and i am saying that your analysis that he played 'well above his rating' might not be worth much.

What makes you think that?

That is not what you said or sounded like you were saying. Maybe next time be more clear.

what did it sound like i was saying? next time, read with greater comprehension.

You said ¨yes. he achieved a 62% accuracy rating in his only game. a wonderful accomplishment.¨ In this sentence you are being sarcastic and telling me that his 62% accuracy is not a wonderful accomplishment. However, you now claim to be telling me that my analysis is not worth much, which is not what you said the first time and doesn't even relate. Is your first language English? were you not taught in a good school?

OK-

That explains quite a lot. I recommend that you get a proper education so we can debate this properly before you spew more nonsense or go off topic again. Trust me, its for your own good.

tlay80

Feb 4, 2024

0

#48

Dude, are you really enjyoing this? Belittling other player's abilities, that is? What's wrong with you?

This is a space for people to help answer questions other players have. If you don't want to do that (and you're the *only* person in this thread who hasn't), that's fine, but please leave.

AngryPuffer

Feb 4, 2024

0

#49

tlay80 wrote:

Dude, are you really enjyoing this? Belittling other player's abilities, that is? What's wrong with you?

This is a space for people to help answer questions other players have. If you don't want to do that (and you're the *only* person in this thread who hasn't), that's fine, but please leave.

Dont waver. let him make a fool of himself or go on with his life.

tlay80

Feb 4, 2024

0

#50

AngryPuffer wrote:

OP simply does not know enough about the sicilian. Lets look at the more modern main line

Blacks position has weaknesses all over the queenside and typically play goes with Nb6 Bxb6 Qxb6 Na5 Rc8 Nc6 Nxd5 Nxe7 Nxe7 Qxd6 and white has a slightly better endgame

To get substantive once again (in hopes the nonsense stops...), I think I missed the last line of this (or was it added later?). Yes, that's better or White than the line I gave, and I'd agree in calling the endgame slightly better for White. But only very slightly, I think. And white should have been very slightly better from the game's start anyway, so I'm not sure Black's really failed here.

It's certainly not crazy to play this way as White, but when I'm playing White in the open Sicilian. I'm typically looking for something more than a slightly better endgame.

MichalMalkowski

Feb 5, 2024

0

#51

theswooze wrote:

MichalMalkowski wrote:

At my club I have a number of sicilan Najdorf play who... *cought*cought* forced me to rethink and reanalise my line against najdorf. I do need to improve.

I use English Attack which is pretty much a system - this setup works against many a sicilian.

But as a gather painfull experience, and after my work of today - tell me weather I am wrong - the English Attack isn't such a great weapon against najdorf sicilian.

First problem - black has no kingside weaknesses - unlike say sicilian dragon. White has to create some, which I am unsure how exactly ( making to f6? making to g6? saccing to open a line?). In my successful games, Black was so helpfull to play unnecessary h6?

Second - black can stall attack by mean of Nh5.

Third - white lags in development, yet he attemts to attack. His white squared bishop stays long on initial square, with no good squares to go to.

Fourth and most important - black attack is plain faster. Luckily, it does not seem crushing.

As I browse databese, I am still to find a high level game in English attack vs Najdorf, where white rips open black King's position and mates him. The games tend to follow the pattern: both sides attack, black attack is much faster, with precise play white fends it off, after which game reaches endgame, which if White has done everything right, should be better for white.

Do I understand it right? Is English attack not really a pawn storm race, but more a mean to provoke black to create weaknesses? And can someone post ( or name) a textbook example of how white should conduct his attack?

dude: your rapid rating is 932. why not just focus on making fewer blunders???

This post is EXACTLY the reason i don't play here. I have registered here to have acces to forum and I do not wish to encounter "you have a rating xyz, so you are to shut up" kind of argument. I regret playing that single game.

MichalMalkowski

Feb 5, 2024

0

#52

nighteyes1234 wrote:

MichalMalkowski wrote:

@AngryPuffer what you have shown is VERY intresting. At first, engine shows Your line to be minimally weaker.

So it goes. Pretenders catch on. Your toy engine says its weaker...is that chess.com?

There are dozens of moves that Gotham chess has...thats not good enough?

Add a Youtube for the latest clickbait.

No, the lichess.org's one. I observed it to be better. I don't trust engines blindly, i have arleady seen games chess.com's engine evaluates very wrongly ( check out Knorr-Chigorin). For that reason i compare evalution with database and wrote "if engine is to be belived". You know, when @AngryPuffer have shown me his line i was amazed. Improvements to current mainline are precious secrets not given away on a forum, and this seemed like one. It seemed too good to be true so i have invested some WORK to investigate. And yes, the line is not new - it is sound but drawish trap, that can crush the unprepared.

AngryPuffer

Feb 5, 2024

0

#53

a lot of the issue with the English attack is that white has to find a sound novelty or the game can easily end in a draw. It's personally why i prefer Bg5 or Bc4 because there is more to explore. while everyone is overly booked up on the English and knows the equalizing forcing h5 lines I personally play something where i can be more creative.

AngryPuffer

Feb 5, 2024

0

#54

theswooze wrote:

MichalMalkowski wrote:

theswooze wrote:

MichalMalkowski wrote:

At my club I have a number of sicilan Najdorf play who... *cought*cought* forced me to rethink and reanalise my line against najdorf. I do need to improve.

I use English Attack which is pretty much a system - this setup works against many a sicilian.

But as a gather painfull experience, and after my work of today - tell me weather I am wrong - the English Attack isn't such a great weapon against najdorf sicilian.

First problem - black has no kingside weaknesses - unlike say sicilian dragon. White has to create some, which I am unsure how exactly ( making to f6? making to g6? saccing to open a line?). In my successful games, Black was so helpfull to play unnecessary h6?

Second - black can stall attack by mean of Nh5.

Third - white lags in development, yet he attemts to attack. His white squared bishop stays long on initial square, with no good squares to go to.

Fourth and most important - black attack is plain faster. Luckily, it does not seem crushing.

As I browse databese, I am still to find a high level game in English attack vs Najdorf, where white rips open black King's position and mates him. The games tend to follow the pattern: both sides attack, black attack is much faster, with precise play white fends it off, after which game reaches endgame, which if White has done everything right, should be better for white.

Do I understand it right? Is English attack not really a pawn storm race, but more a mean to provoke black to create weaknesses? And can someone post ( or name) a textbook example of how white should conduct his attack?

dude: your rapid rating is 932. why not just focus on making fewer blunders???

This post is EXACTLY the reason i don't play here. I have registered here to have acces to forum and I do not wish to encounter "you have a rating xyz, so you are to shut up" kind of argument. I regret playing that single game.

ANY reason you have for not playing here is fine with me. Playing under the guise of being a beginner when you clearly are not, does not absolve you from being a d bag. Have fun playing elsewhere.

You must have a hard time making friends. What makes this guy a ¨d bag¨ for trying out chess.com then deciding not to use it outside of the forums? I and many others do that as well and its not ¨unsportsmanlike ¨ ¨mean¨, or anything thats bad.

You have got to learn to stop antagonizing people and changing your story. Please stay consistent.

AngryPuffer

Feb 5, 2024

0

#55