To Chessman1504, no doubt chess players are an ornery lot and sometimes not all can be read between the lines. I didn't realize you were making a counter-joke. I apologize for misconstruing your initial Carlsen post. No worries.
Throughout this Caro thread there are many lack of thought swipes and I thought yours was another addition. I stand corrected. Sorry about that.
To Chessman1504, no doubt chess players are an ornery lot and sometimes not all can be read between the lines. I didn't realize you were making a counter-joke. I apologize for misconstruing your initial Carlsen post. No worries.
Throughout this Caro thread there are many lack of thought swipes and I thought yours was another addition. I stand corrected. Sorry about that.
And I'm sorry for overreacting. Sometimes, I do that. It has to do with my paper-thin skin. In any case, it is all fine :)
I only stated that i PERSONALLY think, that the CK is boring...i didnt wanted to start the third world war...
I only stated that i PERSONALLY think, that the CK is boring...i didnt wanted to start the third world war...
Oh, it's okay. I never had a problem with your statement, anyway.
I only stated that i PERSONALLY think, that the CK is boring...i didnt wanted to start the third world war...
Oh, it's okay. I never had a problem with your statement, anyway.
No prob, thanks for your answer!
The Caro, or "halfcicilian",is ok when playing for a draw against equal competition, or sometimes beat slightly weaker players, but against markedly stronger players, its just one horrendous way to lose
I only stated that i PERSONALLY think, that the CK is boring...i didnt wanted to start the third world war...
And your personal opinion may come from the fact that you think there is nothing going on in those positions when really there is, you just can't detect it. Indeed, when you can't detect the intricacies of a situation it's as if they don't exist, so a natural reaction would be to be bored by it.
I play the CK a lot, especially in online games where white advances the e pawn. 1. e4 c6. 2.d4 d5 3. e5 c5 catches them a lot in a quandry and I end up winning a center pawn when I attack the base of the chain. I haven't used it in tournament paly though....
I only stated that i PERSONALLY think, that the CK is boring...i didnt wanted to start the third world war...
And your personal opinion may come from the fact that you think there is nothing going on in those positions when really there is, you just can't detect it. Indeed, when you can't detect the intricacies of a situation it's as if they don't exist, so a natural reaction would be to be bored by it.
Thanks for your statement...i will explain my judgement about CK.
I always play the BDG 1.d4 d5 2.e4 and then some players decline with 2...c6, so that iam forced to play the CK.
And mostly these players dont try to play active chess, normally they only want to simplify the position to reach the endgame quickly.
Yes, on GM-level CK-players will act different, but on amateur level i think a CK-player mainly wants to reach a defensive position with no weaknesses.
Why not play 3.f3?
carokann is so boring, be a man and play the latvian gambit
Post#60: Well, I'm sure there are amateurs like that, just like there are amateurs who only understand reckless attacks and nothing else, but we shouldn't be too prejudiced :)
Any strong player (could be below master but perhaps around 2000 OTB or so) who plays the caro kann will be totally happy to conduct a strong attack, if they can get their pieces freed up (e.g. with a ...c5 or ...e5 break) and can get enough piece activity. After all, when you break open the center, you are giving your pieces the ability to hit plenty of targets, which certainly can include the enemy king. Sure, the structure often becomes symmetrical, but if you are better at handling your pieces than your opponent, then you should succeed in taking over the initiative, i.e., making threats that forces your opponent to keep reacting to your ideas.
The key difference between a caro kann strategy and an early gambit is that the caro kann strategy simply tries to get these freed up pieces without committing to a sacrifice right at the start. The gambit players are willing to do anything to get piece activity, even at the risk of a poor position, while a caro kann type player, as much as they will grab any opportunity they get, view the risk a gambit takes as unnecessary, as perhaps later on they may take over the initiative without having to sacrifice at all!
But again, any strong player loves tactical possibilities; the question is how bad of a position are they willing to risk to get them.
carokann is so boring, be a man and play the latvian gambit
Actually, isn't it women who tend to have more aggressive styles? 
carokann is so boring, be a man and play the latvian gambit
Whee...and best completely lost against best play...awesome!
I think the caro kann is the best reply to e4. Unless one is in a must win situation, then a extremely sharp line in the sicilian would suffice
I think the caro kann is the best reply to e4. Unless one is in a must win situation, then a extremely sharp line in the sicilian would suffice
An extremely sharp Sicilian line would result in a forced draw if White wants it...
carokann is so boring, be a man and play the latvian gambit
Whee...and best completely lost against best play...awesome!
wrong son, nice excuse for not having the guts to play it though +1
I think the caro kann is the best reply to e4. Unless one is in a must win situation, then a extremely sharp line in the sicilian would suffice
An extremely sharp Sicilian line would result in a forced draw if White wants it...
If that was the case the sicilian would never be played
carokann is so boring, be a man and play the latvian gambit
Whee...and best completely lost against best play...awesome!
wrong son, nice excuse for not having the guts to play it though +1
Its a matter of taste...i always play the Latvian, when i have the chance to and i have good results with it, because it perfectly fits to my style of chess play, others will prefer the Caro-Kann, becaus they like it solid.
@Mainline Novelty: you are right...maybe the Latvian is refuted, but, as you stated, only with best play from the White side.
Ive played so many matches with the Latvian and i almost never met anyone, who played a refutation line against me...
probably one of the most boring openings ever...fits perfectly to people who get excited with the QGD exchange variation...
Well, I guess it depends on one's viewpoint. I, for one, find the struggles fascinating! :)
Oh yeah, and what the heck man? I just said this 30 hours ago. My opinions don't change in thirty hours or the time between your post and this. Typical, people on chess.com simply trying to start an argument.