What do you think of the Colle System

Sort:
pfren
ChesswithNickolay wrote:

One game doesn't matter at all. You cannot argue against a database.

Of course you can argue against a database if the games are sourced from kindergarten championships.

Marcyful
Optimissed wrote:
pfren wrote:
ChesswithNickolay wrote:

One game doesn't matter at all. You cannot argue against a database.

Of course you can argue against a database if the games are sourced from kindergarten championships.

Exactly, I had an identical argument with someone else recently. Some database where all the games were probably sourced from bullet competitions, where the ratings were all inflated, as they probably are here.

I get this feeling you had that argument with that someone else in one of my forums...

pfren
ChesswithNickolay wrote:

 I am not talking about some trash database. I am talking about the Master's Database.

 

Chessbase Mega Database, updated since a couple of weeks ago. Only long time control games show, sorted by rating white. You are right, only a few patzers play the Colle.

 

Marcyful
Optimissed wrote:
Marcyful wrote:
Optimissed wrote:
pfren wrote:
ChesswithNickolay wrote:

One game doesn't matter at all. You cannot argue against a database.

Of course you can argue against a database if the games are sourced from kindergarten championships.

Exactly, I had an identical argument with someone else recently. Some database where all the games were probably sourced from bullet competitions, where the ratings were all inflated, as they probably are here.

I get this feeling you had that argument with that someone else in one of my forums...

You mean threads?
I think maybe so. Can you recall who that someone was?

Yeah, not gonna name them though for ethical reasons.

aanval22

Colle is passive, but venomous. I've lost to it a lot because I didn't know what to do.

dorthcaar

i dont remember colle system much

 but zuckertort variation.. was better if i recall correctly. or maybe i liked it i dont remember exactly.

Suzan polgar likes it.. it was suzan right.. yeah correct. i found her video. this was a good video

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dorwTb_J1uc

pfren
dorthcaar wrote:

i dont remember colle system much

 but zuckertort variation.. was better if i recall correctly. or maybe i liked it i dont remember exactly.

Suzan polgar likes it.. it was suzan right.. yeah correct. i found her video. this was a good video

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dorwTb_J1uc

 

Most strong players prefer the Zuckertort, as it is stratyegically richer than the Koltanowski. Both are perfectly playable, though.

PILOTOXOMXD
B1ZMARK wrote:
PILOTOXOMXD wrote:

and to all london players, plz play something thats actually interesting and not just random bishop moves

cope + stay mad + skill issue

T-T why u gotta expose me like that

Stil1
Optimissed wrote:

I also suspect that preference is inbuilt into some analysis engines, which would explain why they like positions with b3, Bb2 and d4, which is completely against the spirit of the Nimzo-Larsen. Another programming error.

I've seen Hikaru Nakamura play an early d4, in Nimzo-Larsen type positions.

He plays it quite often, actually (when playing online). He rarely seems puts his pawn on d3, unless it's more of a KIA position.

It usually seems to work out nicely for him. His d4 pawn either advances to d5, or gets exchanged away for black's c5 or e5 pawn, at some point.

So Bb2 + d4 is obviously playable, but I agree with you that blocking that bishop in often "feels" wrong.

When analyzing on my laptop, Stockfish seems to like d4 more (grabbing central space), while Komodo seems to like d3 more (keeping the bishop open).

Stil1

Yes, I sometimes disagree with engine analysis / Game Review, too.

I'd rather play a slightly worse human move, if it makes sense to me, than a superior engine move that I don't fully understand, or am not comfortable with.

Carlsen said something similar, when Maurice Ashley asked him why a won game of his wasn't "smooth", like the engine's analysis.

Carlsen was visibly annoyed, and basically replied that he doesn't care what the engine thinks.

orlock20

Colle is a draw according to the latest version of Stockfish. There is more than one Colle set up including transforming into QGD.

pfren
orlock20 wrote:

Colle is a draw according to the latest version of Stockfish. There is more than one Colle set up including transforming into QGD.

 

1. Stockfish may claim "equal" but certainly enough not "a draw".

2. It does not matter at all what Stockfish claims for an human vs human game.

3. It has become very fashionable to quote Stockfish for every little nonsense someone invents.

Stil1
Optimissed wrote:

I'd rather play a slightly better human move, if it makes sense to me, than an inferior engine move that I don't fully understand, or am not comfortable with, also.

I see what you did, there. Touché. tongue.png

pfren
ChesswithNickolay wrote:

I though the Colle player has to passively defend?

Thinking isn't your main strength, it seems.

Especially in the Colle-Koltanowski, white's main plan is an aggessive one: get at Black's king, and the attacking plans are quite typical- reminiscent to the Semi-Slav Meran (in reverse here).

pfren
Optimissed wrote:

You say you have a chess coach? 

 

This is just one of his countless hallucinations.

He hallucinates being Russian (he isn't), a strong player (he isn't), having a 2700 coach (he has not), an improviser (he isn't), and a strong candidate for a master title by the end of this year (he doesn't even have a Chess Federation ID yet).

Stil1

The Colle-Zukertort (the modern preference for handling the Colle) has a lot of aggressive potential.

 

Look at white's bishops knifing down the board, aimed at black's kingside. White also keeps some flexibility ... he can exchange on c5 and play a c4 pawn thrust, to give the game more of a Queen's Gambit feel ... or he can exchange on c5 and play an e4 pawn thrust, to approach things more like a Colle-Koltanowski ... He could even plop a knight on e5 and threaten to attack black's kingside, with ideas like f4 ... Rf3 .. and Rh3..

There are a lot of ideas, in the Colle, for aggressive players. If black isn't careful, he can get steamrolled pretty fast.

Stil1
Optimissed wrote:

Now I come to think, it's a kind of reversed Meran, without wasting a move on c3, so white is two moves ahead. I think I see it clearer now.

To be fair, I do think black is okay, if he plays accurately. Though I believe the Colle has a lot of bite to it, if black takes it for granted.

It's like the London, in a way ... I find they both have reputations for being rather benign "systems", but they can both end up punishing black quite aggressively, if he isn't careful.

orlock20
Optimissed wrote:
orlock20 wrote:

Colle is a draw according to the latest version of Stockfish. There is more than one Colle set up including transforming into QGD.

Everything that's a reasonable opening is a draw. Colle, played well, is harder to defend against than many.

There is the belief that perfect play will lead to a draw. Since the Colle System is a draw with perfect play, it's about the players and not the opening.

 

pfren
ChesswithNickolay wrote:

 I never said I am Russian.

 

sndeww
ChesswithNickolay wrote:
pfren wrote:
ChesswithNickolay wrote:

I though the Colle player has to passively defend?

Thinking isn't your main strength, it seems.

Especially in the Colle-Koltanowski, white's main plan is an aggessive one: get at Black's king, and the attacking plans are quite typical- reminiscent to the Semi-Slav Meran (in reverse here).

Thinking isn't your main strength, it seems.

A coherent post that refutes every single point that the international master said, in one sentence!