Forums

Why the Grob is Severely Underrated: An Analysis

Sort:
Avatar of darkunorthodox88
NM darkunorthodox88
May 6, 2018
0
#41
chessgm8 wrote:
Miaoiao wrote:

There is a straight-forward refutation of the Grob, and you vcan find it vone many databases. 

And how many of your average players will spend their time studying how to beat such an off-beat opening as the Grob?

anyone who has lost to you playing 1.g4 basically. we live in an age that you cant play outright refuted openings, before someone looks up what you play.

Avatar of Hadron
Hadron
May 6, 2018
0
#42
chessgm8 wrote:

I wasn't trying to say that you could use the Grob to beat players significantly stronger than you, nor am I saying that if you follow the plans in the opening you will win no matter the rating. I'm merely asking if you should fundamentally change the plans of your opening based on your opponent's strength?

Basically you are asking a "how long is a piece of string" question and I don't think any answer I or anyone gives you will match up to your expectations.

Your opponents strength is only one aspect to consider before a game. When you rock up to play and you find your opening choice going sideways then to answer your question, yes you should re-evaluate your plan

But before a game? If you have every confidence that the opening you play (and by extension its accompanying plan) will work even against a higher rated opponent then why would you can the opening (and its plan)? Really, why would you? so....no

You asking a question based upon absolutes and until you realize that chess is not about such things maybe you might come to grips with it

Avatar of chessgm8
chessgm8
May 6, 2018
0
#43
Hadron wrote:
chessgm8 wrote:

I wasn't trying to say that you could use the Grob to beat players significantly stronger than you, nor am I saying that if you follow the plans in the opening you will win no matter the rating. I'm merely asking if you should fundamentally change the plans of your opening based on your opponent's strength?

Basically you are asking a "how long is a piece of string" question and I don't think any answer I or anyone gives you will match up to your expectations.

Your opponents strength is only one aspect to consider before a game. When you rock up to play and you find your opening choice going sideways then to answer your question, yes you should re-evaluate your plan

But before a game? If you have every confidence that the opening you play (and by extension its accompanying plan) will work even against a higher rated opponent then why would you can the opening (and its plan)? Really, why would you? so....no

You asking a question based upon absolutes and until you realize that chess is not about such things maybe you might come to grips with it

What I'm trying to say is that your opponent's rating shouldn't affect the plans in the opening. While you may use different plans (switching openings, etc.) based on the rating, if you have decided to play an opening then your opponent's strength or time control shouldn't change the opening's plans, correct?

Avatar of chessgm8
chessgm8
May 6, 2018
0
#44
BobbyTalparov wrote:
chessgm8 wrote:
Miaoiao wrote:

There is a straight-forward refutation of the Grob, and you vcan find it vone many databases. 

And how many of your average players will spend their time studying how to beat such an off-beat opening as the Grob?

When I was rated 1000 OTB, I had a game against an 1800+ who played the Grob. If I had been strong enough to see the (rather convulted) mate in 2 I had available, I would have won. So, if a class A who has spent over 20 years playing this ridiculous opening struggles with it against a class E player, it is rather absurd to say it is any good.

Perhaps in OTB classical games, yes.

Avatar of darkunorthodox88
NM darkunorthodox88
May 6, 2018
0
#45

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1026276

Avatar of chessgm8
chessgm8
May 6, 2018
0
#46
darkunorthodox88 wrote:
chessgm8 wrote:
Miaoiao wrote:

There is a straight-forward refutation of the Grob, and you vcan find it vone many databases. 

And how many of your average players will spend their time studying how to beat such an off-beat opening as the Grob?

anyone who has lost to you playing 1.g4 basically. we live in an age that you cant play outright refuted openings, before someone looks up what you play.

But can the Grob really be refuted so easily?

Avatar of chessgm8
chessgm8
May 6, 2018
0
#47
BobbyTalparov wrote:
chessgm8 wrote:

Perhaps in OTB classical games, yes.

I think you missed the point:  If a 1000-rated player can refute it OTB (without ever having seen it) against an 1800+-rated player who plays it all the time (ignoring the time control), then you can safely say the opening is crap.

But was the opening itself refuted or did your opponent play a bad game?

Avatar of chessgm8
chessgm8
May 6, 2018
0
#48
BobbyTalparov wrote:
chessgm8 wrote:

But was the opening itself refuted or did your opponent play a bad game?

The game went south for him as soon as he played 1. g4 

He quite obviously does not know how to harness the Grob's incredible strength . . .

Avatar of darkunorthodox88
NM darkunorthodox88
May 6, 2018
0
#49

not that long back basman played 1.g4 vs giri and held his own quite well. he actually got a healthy  equality from the opening. but basman is somewhat inactive, in his 70's IM, vs one of the leading young masters. you cant expect miracles either

Avatar of darkunorthodox88
NM darkunorthodox88
May 6, 2018
0
#50
Miaoiao wrote:

Here we play correspondence chess. I have behind me the knowledge of databases. Dare to play me.

what good is a database if your opponent can go out of book in move 5?

Avatar of darkunorthodox88
NM darkunorthodox88
May 6, 2018
0
#51
Miaoiao wrote:

The databases show all what is necessary to refute the opening. Don't underestimate me, I can work out (weaker) side steps from the main variants. 

you with access to database vs michael basman playing 1.g4 in a g/90 and my money is completely with basman.

Avatar of MetalRatel
NM MetalRatel
May 6, 2018
0
#52

I think the Grob is slightly overrated for trolling people. Well 4 pages in 10 hours is all right I guess...

Avatar of MetalRatel
NM MetalRatel
May 6, 2018
0
#53

Not sure what database you're referring to, but database research tends to decline in utility against rare sidelines with a dearth of quality games.

Avatar of BronsteinPawn
BronsteinPawn
May 6, 2018
0
#54

Dont play the opponent, play the damn board. You are not Tal, you are a chess.com member, get it!!!!

 

Other than that this is good trolling. I am still proud of my South Korean high autism rates joke. Made me feel educated and loved.

Avatar of darkunorthodox88
NM darkunorthodox88
May 6, 2018
0
#55

a big percentage of club players find unorthodox openings fascinating and/or the idea of less opening theory enticing. players like Basman and Welling can get away with a lot but they are a very small and rare percentage of strong players.

 

but really, i cannot recommend the grob. if you like playing weird stuff, play something that is fully sound and is at worst equal like 1.f4 or 1.b4

Avatar of MetalRatel
NM MetalRatel
May 6, 2018
0
#56

Playing the board is so overwhelming. All these random messages pile up with inane chatter and eventually I just give up. Even Tsvetkov gets discouraged and he's a pro at it.

Avatar of MickinMD
MickinMD
May 6, 2018
0
#57

There really isn't an analysis here, just a list of games.  No discussion of strategy and common tactics, no mention of typical strategies (K-side or Q-side attack, opposite castling, etc.). no mention of how Stockfish or Houdini or whatever engine rates the positions, etc.

I would like to see that.

Avatar of darkunorthodox88
NM darkunorthodox88
May 6, 2018
0
#58
Miaoiao wrote:

NM Metalratel, do you, or do you not acknowledge that there exists objectivity in chess? And that my claim is correct?

---

I challenge you now personally to two games. I play black in both, 3 days for each move, you play 1.g4.

---

Btw, I believe that 1.b4 is OBJECTIVELY slightly worse for White, although not losing. This means, it is definitely playable.

 

About 1.f4 I am not sure about the objective value. But Black has less problems to equalize than in other openings, like 1.e4, 1.d4, 1.c4, 1.Nf3.

what does -0.1 even MEAN "objectively"?

Avatar of MetalRatel
NM MetalRatel
May 7, 2018
0
#59

@Miaoiao I don't think you understand me at all. I'm not sure why I'd want to play such a poor opening myself as White. I don't play correspondence either. I was simply making the observation that game quality tends to decline on the fringes of theory. Sure, a few good model games can be a guide, but you have to fill in the blanks yourself. But maybe Chessbase released the Big Grob Power Database and I just missed out.

Avatar of MetalRatel
NM MetalRatel
May 7, 2018
0
#60

No, I don't play correspondence. HARD RULE. Sorry.

The Grob is a terrible opening I would never consider playing as White in a serious game. As the nuance of my previous point has been completely lost, I don't know how to make myself clearer. I was simply speaking from my experience of refuting dubious openings in my personal research. Sometimes the objectively strongest continuations are not in the database.