If you play an opening because of the fashion trends at top level you should stop playing chess. Play openings that suit your style or that have given you good results, that appeal to you as a player, not to the elite 10. For example I'm undefeated with the Czech Benoni against players higher rated than me as well. (6-0)
why is ruy lopez considered the strongest
Sort:
Jul 29, 2015
0
#203
A superficial reading of this thread may lead someone to believe that a bunch of OTB +2000 players are ganging up on some B player.
A closer reading will show that 5oS just keeps swinging out at everyone, making ridiculous statement after ridiculous statement. Just read his last few responses to me.
Garry Kasparov
Number of games in database: 2,346
Years covered: 1973 to 2015
Last FIDE rating: 2812
Highest rating achieved in database: 2851
Overall record: +766 -115 =752 (69.9%)*
* Overall winning percentage = (wins+draws/2) / total games
Based on games in the database; may be incomplete.
713 exhibition games, odds games, etc. are excluded from this statistic.
As anyone can see in the above post from chessgames.com the Scotch is not even listed as one of Kasparov's " most played openings " and yet FOS keeps harping on his playing the Scotch as if it has some great significance . The FACT is that in his career he consistently played the Ruy and had a brief " fling " ( 22 games I believe ) with the Scotch . This would indicate to me that he obviously believed the Ruy was a better choice/weapon for him overall . I mean when you play an opening 5x more than another what else to think ?
Reb wrote:
Garrus_Vakarian wrote:
The Ruy Lopez is not the best,and many strong players use other openings.
Do I really have to remember you all that Garry Kasparov loved and used regularly the Scotch game?
Do I really have to say that Paul Morphy,Adolf Anderssen and a bunch of other legends of the XIX century basically only played the King's Gambit and the Evans' Gambit with incredible scores and awesome and immortal games?
The Vienna Game is regularly played by a lot of strong Grandmasters,just search their games.
The Ruy is an option,but none can tell it's the best.
He played the Scotch 22 times in his career and the Ruy over 100 times . It appears he loved the Ruy more .
Reb's memory fails him.
Fiveofswords wrote:
SmyslovFan wrote:
Shooting fish in a barrel.
5oS makes it very easy to attack him because he starts off by acting as if his opinion is more valuable than those who are authorities on the issue. He and others then erroneously say that these experts are making a logical fallacy. He claims to have studied philosophy, so he should know when relying on the practice of authorities is acceptable.
One of the reasons the Spanish is so rich is that, unlike many 1.e4 e5 openings, it can be played as a closed opening. There are lines of the Spanish that have more in common with the Benoni than with the Italian.
Korchnoi tried to revitalize the Open lines, but got beat down by Karpov. Since then, the Open has taken a back seat to closed variations of the Spanish.
really im kinda awestruck by your understanding of the ruy. its cool cause maybe its closed...korchnoi tried the open but it didnt work so well. i mean the level of sophistication in this point of view is astounding...why should anyone play the scotch?! its not closed!...italian? never closed of course!
You don't have to try any more to show us that you have no idea what an open, semi-open, or closed game is- you have already done that. This piece of information is on the first page of any decent strategy book, and that page was obviously missing from your copy.
Game_of_Pawns wrote:
Reb wrote:
Garrus_Vakarian wrote:
The Ruy Lopez is not the best,and many strong players use other openings.
Do I really have to remember you all that Garry Kasparov loved and used regularly the Scotch game?
Do I really have to say that Paul Morphy,Adolf Anderssen and a bunch of other legends of the XIX century basically only played the King's Gambit and the Evans' Gambit with incredible scores and awesome and immortal games?
The Vienna Game is regularly played by a lot of strong Grandmasters,just search their games.
The Ruy is an option,but none can tell it's the best.
He played the Scotch 22 times in his career and the Ruy over 100 times . It appears he loved the Ruy more .
Reb's memory fails him.
Indeed !! My wife says the same thing ! 
Jul 29, 2015
0
#209
Fiveofswords wrote:
Reb wrote:
As anyone can see in the above post from chessgames.com the Scotch is not even listed as one of Kasparov's " most played openings " and yet FOS keeps harping on his playing the Scotch as if it has some great significance . The FACT is that in his career he consistently played the Ruy and had a brief " fling " ( 22 games I believe ) with the Scotch . This would indicate to me that he obviously believed the Ruy was a better choice/weapon for him overall . I mean when you play an opening 5x more than another what else to think ?
his brief fling involved winning a world champion match
I remember Bobby Fischer saying that he was only kidding with his, "1.e4 is best by test." That's why he played 1.c4 when the championship was on the line.
As I said before, Kasparov found new paths in the Scotch and played it against Karpov to put him before problems he should solve over the board. This is a practical reason for choosing it, it doesn't mean it's theoretically equal to the Ruy.
Jul 29, 2015
0
#211
Fiveofswords wrote:
so i dunno...anyone care to explain to me why kasparov would choose to play an inferior opening for his wc title?
Pulp just did.
Jul 29, 2015
0
#212
What's wrong with being class B? 1700 OTB is much higher than most people that post on this forum.
Simple really ...he had a great deal of respect for Karpov's expertise in the Spanish AND his preparation for it ! I imagine him playing the Scotch completely surprised Karpov and I doubt seriously Karpov had prepared at all to face the Scotch . Do you even realize that he played the Ruy in this match you are talking about in 8 games while playing the Scotch only twice ? ! 
Jul 29, 2015
0
#214
lolurspammed wrote:
What's wrong with being class B? 1700 OTB is much higher than most people that post on this forum.
Nothing wrong with being class B, but insulting strong experts and titled players and thinking you know more about chess than they do is a bit ridiculous...
Fiveofswords wrote:
of course...i have a right to debate all i want about chess. i wouldnt even need to be good. and im sure you may have guessed this but i dont even think you are better than me at the game :p in my perspective you are actually weaker than me and understand less. and maybe you would understand more if you tinkered with computers more...but probably your foolishness would hold you back. i study chess just because i need a mental outlet...i dont need to go to tournaments and i dont get anything from it. I dont really expect you to understand...the concept of a mental outlet is probably totally bizarre to you
You're probably right about this. I get the impression that Reb is more impressed by folks who do something...even if they ain't any good at it, than by folks who do nothing but ramble on about how smart they are.
I'm just waiting for you to challenge him to a game in Atlanta again. Though, I'm sure you couldn't find the time to get off your ass and actually meet him.
Jul 29, 2015
0
#216
What's a rating? After all he's only provisional. I'm sure he could beat some 2000+ players. If I've fine it so can he.
Fiveofswords wrote:
of course...i have a right to debate all i want about chess. i wouldnt even need to be good. and im sure you may have guessed this but i dont even think you [Reb] are better than me at the game :p in my perspective you are actually weaker than me and understand less. and maybe you would understand more if you tinkered with computers more...but probably your foolishness would hold you back. i study chess just because i need a mental outlet...i dont need to go to tournaments and i dont get anything from it. I dont really expect you to understand...the concept of a mental outlet is probably totally bizarre to you
Fiveofswords wrote:
there was no theoretical discussion in this thread. reb didnt care to try any detail about how white must get a better position in the ruy than from other openings...didnt want to try that with me. preferred to just go straight to ad hominem. so whatever expertise they are supposed to have is concealed at the very least
I completely agree with this, but you can't deny having said that you think you know more about chess.
Jul 29, 2015
0
#219
lolurspammed wrote:
What's a rating? After all he's only provisional. I'm sure he could beat some 2000+ players. If I've fine it so can he.
Maybe, but for some reason, I suspect he won't play that much OTB chess in the future. Looks like he is more into proving his "intellectual superiority" in the chess.com forums 
In the 1990 WC match between Karpov and Kasparov that FOS brings up to show that Kasparov played the Scotch with success its interesting that he played the scotch twice in this match , winning once and drawing once . He also played the Ruy in 8 games winning 4 of them ! The match is also interesting in that neither player lost with white and Karpov didnt play 1 e4 a single game while Kasparov played only 1 e4 in the match .
if they were saying that my dear...then they were agreeing with me.
I'm not your dear, not even a fan. And did I miss where Reb said the Ruy Lopez is "best" (as in singularly best) rather than "there is nothing better"? I would go back through the posts if there weren't so many. Exactly what is the specific point of contention?