Considering chess is a draw with best play, and theory extends further and further, I would assume 'best' is what gives you better practical winning chances at your level.
I think this is the most important point on the thread. And since the Ruy is one of the most strategically complex, it is one of the 'best' at the top level.
Williams tends to play left-handed openings, as Petrosian used to call them, English and QP lines. When he does play 1.e4 e5 as White, he does play the King's Gambit, but those are very rare guests in his repertoire.
And Arawn the problem is that people in this thread are using their ratings as justification for their arguments when people higher rated than them do disagree. Plus there's nothing wrong with playing slightly inferior moves at times for an imbalanced position, for example the Benoni.
When the titled players say that the Spanish is the most complex opening, they aren't just talking about tactics, they are also talking about strategies. Even +2800 rated players can be led astray and make strategic errors in the Spanish. It says a tremendous amount about the Spanish that until 2000, the Berlin was considered to be just great for White. It took a world champion at the height of his powers to demonstrate Black's defensive resources. And even now, 15 years later, that variation alone is one of the most popular for both sides.
The Spanish has been studied as long as the modern game of chess has been around, and it's still offering huge challenges. There is no other opening that compares to the Queen of Openings in terms of its longevity and strategic complexity.
Every single world champion has played the Spanish, as white or Black, and most have played both sides in serious competition. Few other openings have such a pedigree, and none beginning with 1.e4.
yes...it does say a lot that amny gms assumed the berlin was not a good line until around 2000. much like how some time ago all the best players in the world felt the ruy was inferior to the italian.
Well at least you're now using he phrase "some time ago." In another thread you said "100 years ago" so I did some database research using Mega Database 2015 and found that the Ruy Lopez three times as much as the Italian Game in 1915.
I think that your argument that grandmasters used to believe that 3...Nf6 was not as strong as 3...a6 is not convincing. It is like those that point to mistakes that Charles Darwin made in his theory of evolution in trying to discredit modern science. All you are saying is that people make mistakes. To bolster your point perhaps you could provide more concrete analysis as to why moves like 3.Nc3, 3.Bc4 and 3.d4 are as strong as 3.Bb5.
modern science doesnt say that the ruy lopez is the best opening. Gms dont say that playing anything other than the ruy is necessarily settling for an inferior game. All we know is that the ruy is more popular...a phenomenon that has multiple explanations...and one should avoid falling into an logical error known as argument from ignorance. We also know that chess is not solved...theory changes. fashion changes. SOmeone claiming the ruy is superior to all other white options has a lot of work to do besides touting his rating and building up a fan club.
I have a degree in philosophy. Please point out to me where I made this logical error?
I'll address the rest of your points when I'm feeling less lazy.
@FOS Since you obviously think you are master strength in chess I have to ask why did you choose to play in the reserve section of the 2014 Georgia State Championship ? You chose to play in the reserve ( under 2000 ) and couldnt win that either .... You certainly spend a lot of time on chess it seems so why play so infrequently ? You played some in 2010 then didnt play again until the 2014 state chmp and havent played since that . Do you consider yourself a serious chess player ?
@FOS Since you obviously think you are master strength in chess...
He said that he believes he is better than you. That doesn't necessarily mean that he beleives he is master strength... Also, I personally can't agree with any of the statements you've made relating to OTB play.
Have you any proof its not the best ? Tell us which opening you think is better after 1 e4 e5 ? That every world champion has played the Ruy , ( as black or white and some both sides of it ) is an obvious indication of its strength and popularity . If it was just about fashion in chess I dont think it would have lasted 100 years .... it would be more like the modern benoni and give way to something else in a decade or so ....
Fiveof Swords: You are ignoring a basic rule of life: When you're in a hole, stop digging! You are becoming the very model of an internet troll. Better and more experienced players than you have tried to explain things to you, but you seem incapable of learning--or even knowing that you have things to learn, You are becoming a colossal waste of time
The highest rated player in this thread said he thinks the Ruy is a bad opening.
i mean seriously...arawn...you argument seems to be this:
when creationists cavail over details in the theory of evolution, they are wrong.
ergo whenever anyone disagrees with anyone they are wrong.
Thats pretty absurd. but anyway if you think that then you should agree with me cause i gave my opinion first and reb disagreed....even though he seemed to decide that he agrees with me when he said "I am not claiming the Ruy is the best
This is not my argument. Your interpretation is very odd.
@FOS Since you obviously think you are master strength in chess...
He said that he believes he is better than you. That doesn't necessarily mean that he beleives he is master strength... Also, I personally can't agree with any of the statements you've made relating to OTB play.
I am an NM , so if he believes he is better than me that means he believes he is master strength . DUH
Everyone is talking about the roy lopez here, and I should add, although I am no master I like to play the Schliemann gambit in responce to it, I learned fairily recently and had great results so far. I made a group on it, as there were no active groups (1 had 7 members and nothing inside) and I want others to learn about it too. It is really fun to play!
Inside we will learn about it and discuss it together, as well as other things.
Feel free to join! If you don't like it, just leave, it is new and we won't spam you. Group info below:
All of you are invited to join the Group "Schliemann/Jaenisch Players".
To learn more about them you can visit their homepage here.
CLICK HERE to join this group now!
Here is a message from the Group Admin:
The Schliemann/Jaenisch is blacks most successful defense against the Roy Lopez. (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5!?) For those who love to play the opening, or just want to discuss or learn about it with us. We are a friendly, international group, and all are welcome. We will have many forums on the lines, and concepts of the opening and will have some (but not tons) of team matches and vote chess to practice. We would love to have you here, feel free to join!
i mean seriously...arawn...you argument seems to be this:
when creationists cavail over details in the theory of evolution, they are wrong.
ergo whenever anyone disagrees with anyone they are wrong.
Thats pretty absurd. but anyway if you think that then you should agree with me cause i gave my opinion first and reb disagreed....even though he seemed to decide that he agrees with me when he said "I am not claiming the Ruy is the best
This is not my argument. Your interpretation is very odd.
so what is your argument...besides some false analogy about creationists
You will have to read my posts carefully. I don't really care to repeat myself. Maybe later if I'm feeling up to it.
No Reb, it doesn't. For his statement to also mean that he believes himself to be of master strength (as well as being better than you), he has to believe that you're of master strength. The fact that you were awarded the title of NM some time ago is a very far stretch from this. DUH
He is right, you are being very dense. He has never said that he believes the Spanish to be inferior to an alternative.
As for people asking him for proof... Proof of what? That he believes the Spanish isn't this fantastic opening that some people believe it to be? He has given plenty of reasons for doubt. What more can you want? Words fail me.
No Reb, it doesn't. For his statement to also mean that he believes himself to be of master strength, he has to believe that you're of master strength. The fact that you were awarded the title of NM some time ago is a very far stretch from this. DUH
He is right, you are being very dense. He has never said that he believes the Spanish to be inferior to an alternative.
As for people asking him for proof... Proof of what? That he believes the Spanish isn't this fantastic opening that some people believe it to be? He has given plenty of reasons for doubt. What more can you want? Words fail me.
This is funny ... what makes you think I am no longer master strength ? Yes I first got the title in 84 and you assume after 31 years I can no longer be master strength ? I have played 3 NMs this year in tournaments and drew all 3 games and 2 of the NMs were half my age and one a fellow senior . You are simply wrong to assume I am no longer master strength and so is FOS if that is what he assumes .
No Reb, it doesn't. For his statement to also mean that he believes himself to be of master strength, he has to believe that you're of master strength. The fact that you were awarded the title of NM some time ago is a very far stretch from this. DUH
He is right, you are being very dense. He has never said that he believes the Spanish to be inferior to an alternative.
As for people asking him for proof... Proof of what? That he believes the Spanish isn't this fantastic opening that some people believe it to be? He has given plenty of reasons for doubt. What more can you want? Words fail me.
This is funny ... what makes you think I am no longer master strength ? Yes I first got the title in 84 and you assume after 31 years I can no longer be master strength ? I have played 3 NMs this year in tournaments and drew all 3 games and 2 of the NMs were half my age and one a fellow senior . You are simply wrong to assume I am no longer master strength and so is FOS if that is what he assumes .
i've analyzed your games and i'm sorry but you're not quite master strength. You are expert level at best. Keep trying to improve though, best of luck.
No Reb, it doesn't. For his statement to also mean that he believes himself to be of master strength, he has to believe that you're of master strength. The fact that you were awarded the title of NM some time ago is a very far stretch from this. DUH
He is right, you are being very dense. He has never said that he believes the Spanish to be inferior to an alternative.
As for people asking him for proof... Proof of what? That he believes the Spanish isn't this fantastic opening that some people believe it to be? He has given plenty of reasons for doubt. What more can you want? Words fail me.
This is funny ... what makes you think I am no longer master strength ? Yes I first got the title in 84 and you assume after 31 years I can no longer be master strength ? I have played 3 NMs this year in tournaments and drew all 3 games and 2 of the NMs were half my age and one a fellow senior . You are simply wrong to assume I am no longer master strength and so is FOS if that is what he assumes .
i've analyzed your games and i'm sorry but you're not quite master strength. You are expert level at best. Keep trying to improve though, best of luck.
I'm sure a class player's analysis is wonderful and mistake free ... how did you get my otb games to analyze ? 
I haven't assumed anything of the sort. I have stated facts:
- FoS said that he believed himself to be a better player than you (that might be slightly wrong, I CBA to go back and find the quote).
- If FoS doesn't believe that you're not of master strength then he is not saying that he believes himself to be master strength.
Of course he may believe that, I don't know either way. I suspect he doesn't believe himself to be of master strength but that is neither here nor there. I haven't made a single mention of what I believe your level of play to be and I have no intention of ever doing so.
The funniest part about this is that you were the one accusing me of making assumptions...
No Reb, it doesn't. For his statement to also mean that he believes himself to be of master strength, he has to believe that you're of master strength. The fact that you were awarded the title of NM some time ago is a very far stretch from this. DUH
He is right, you are being very dense. He has never said that he believes the Spanish to be inferior to an alternative.
As for people asking him for proof... Proof of what? That he believes the Spanish isn't this fantastic opening that some people believe it to be? He has given plenty of reasons for doubt. What more can you want? Words fail me.
This is funny ... what makes you think I am no longer master strength ? Yes I first got the title in 84 and you assume after 31 years I can no longer be master strength ? I have played 3 NMs this year in tournaments and drew all 3 games and 2 of the NMs were half my age and one a fellow senior . You are simply wrong to assume I am no longer master strength and so is FOS if that is what he assumes .
i've analyzed your games and i'm sorry but you're not quite master strength. You are expert level at best. Keep trying to improve though, best of luck.
Will you share your analysis?
Actually Williams DOES say he thinks the KG is the best way to play for a win with white against e5. Saying a certain opening is superior to all other replies to a second move is dumb no matter your rating. And btw people higher rated than you guys would disagree with you.
I'll watch the videos again. I remember his qualifying his comments a bit more than that.
They are interesting even though he repeats himself a little too much. I enjoy playing the King's Gambit. I go on a KG binge every few years, always learning a new way to approach old problems.
I play enough OTB chess to know that I shouldnt argue with my superiors ( GMs in particular ) as I have had enough beatings by them to understand that they know far more than I do about chess .