kco wrote:
DrSpudnik wrote:
I lost my work
the parrot ate it, right ?
Parrots don't eat, they just squawk when they think they have something important to type.
The Fundamentals Of Opening Play: The Secret of Wayward MayTRICKS
Sort:
queenwaltzer89 wrote:
Estragon wrote:
So, as I understand it, these "Matrix Principles" That style is one of the very oldest in chess.
Yes there are principles.
Principle 1) Early attack with the Queen in order to seak early mates. By playing for the early mate you force your opponent to have to stop the early mate. Even though it is quite easy to stop the early mate, black can only play a certain amount of reasonable moves.
2) These certain "reasonable" moves which black can play symplify the game a great deal. White knows the reasonable moves which black can play. So White is "giving" a bag of three or four moves which black has to choose from. White already knows the best response to each move. (Like in any other opening)
3) "Coincidence Squares" are basically the squares which from the basic set up will allow for early attacks because from the onset of the game these squares can be attacked early. Does not mean they are more or less vulnerable, but simply that they can be attacked early by multiple pieces. Nothing special here.
4) The Principle of Mobility in regard to Bishops:
Now this is where the controversy arises. Bishops have nearly the same value as rooks in Matrix chess. The reason is that Bishops are more active in the beginning, and they can support the queen in an early mate threat. The rooks have no power in the beginning. They are sleeping Giants. Therefore, at least until they emerge, they don't pose any threat.
The Second game shows an example of Black Capturing a rook that was not moving, and White utilizing his pieces which are mobile.
Do they have any books on this subject?
So....
What happens when instead it goes 1e4 c5 2. Qh5 e6 ?
queenwaltzer89 wrote:
Parrots don't eat
well..actually, they kinda do....
Feb 8, 2013
0
#28
#31: 8. ... Bg4 9. Bf6: Bf3: 10. Bd8: Be2: 11. Bc7: Bg4 12. Bd6: and white has won two pawns.
8. ... Bg4 9. Bf6: Bf3: 10. Bd8: Bg2: 11. Rg1 Bf3 12. Bc7: Nb4 Bb3 d5 and white has won a pawn.
queenwaltzer89 wrote:
Fear_ItseIf wrote:
lol, black suffers from a mental disadvantage.
We can all see that by the way he dropped his bishop.
The mental disadvantage refers to the fact that black is compelled to move a certain way, whether he likes it or not. So even if he is in a good position, the mental disadvantage becomes manifest by the fact that he is playing to whites tune. But since you know everything, I probably just repeated what you already knew.
Certainly you're not so new to chess that you don't realize this happens for both players all the time through the course of any normal game. There are threats that have so called "only moves" to defend.
The trick is if you can force an uncomfortable position. But even you admit on black's 4th move that his position is not difficult:
"4 Qe2 seems to just cramp black's easy development"
Other than contradictory comments like this, the only mental disadvantage is making up stories in your mind about the opponent. Not just you and not just this game, but any time an annotator makes a comment like this.
queenwaltzer89 wrote:
Today I will be introducing a controversial yet powerful way in defeat your opponent--and quick. Matrix Principles are new and innovative way to play chess. Matrix principles rely heavily on early attacks, quick mate threats, and pure tactical schemes. Matrix Chess is the tyle of Chess compared to that of Mike Tyson: Attack early, quickly, and swiftly for the knockout. Here is a game for example:
So your powerful and controversial (I feel like I've stepped into a cheesy diet advertisement) is based around attacks and tactics. Yet the game you choose to showcase this style misses a simple tactic on move 10... and then you miss it again when you annotate it.
There's something missing alright...
That method works with an ok chance on other sites. Not here as they know too much here. One might think it is a good idea to try in blitz ... go ahead. When you find your way back here post the game! When we look at it you can get yours wounds look at simultaneously.
What is there not to understand? Everyone plays openings they choose because they hear from "good players" that they are good openings. There was a time where The Reti, Nimsovich, English, King's Indian etc were considered unsound but only time can tell I suppoze
queenwaltzer89 wrote:
What is there not to understand?
hm...
queenwaltzer89 wrote:
What is there not to understand? Everyone plays openings they choose because they hear from "good players" that they are good openings. There was a time where The Reti, Nimsovich, English, King's Indian etc were considered unsound but only time can tell I suppoze
I take nobodys work on what are good openings. By the time it hit my ears i figure everybody is saying what to play against it to beat it. That line of thinking is not smart. I go the opposite direction.
"Do what everybody else is doing and expect average result" I forgot who said that but it is so true. Be unique and find it yourself.
queenwaltzer89 wrote:
What is there not to understand? Everyone plays openings they choose because they hear from "good players" that they are good openings. There was a time where The Reti, Nimsovich, English, King's Indian etc were considered unsound but only time can tell I suppoze
I'm still curious what you would do if it went 1e4 c5 2. Qh5 e6 seems like it creates problems for your whole opening plan.
Who knew that the path to chess mastery was through algebra class:
Wow! So my years of slogging away at Eigenvalues and Wronksians and vector matrices will finally come to some use?
wohhhhhooooooooooooooo!
You get a lot of girls.