I remember the first time that I refuted a mainline chess opening...
will never EVER have to worry about facing a mainline sicilian. cant refute this
Sort:
I'm always confused why there are people out there that think they can refute a mainline openings that GM's and strong computers like Rybka, Houdini and Fritz have spent years analyzing and playing. You'd think that its called a "mainline" because those are theoretically the best moves available...
Jun 9, 2011
0
#25
bl4der wrote:
if winning a pawn wins you the game.... then every gambit ever invented is completely useless right?
No, here is why. Gambits are designed to give up the pawn with compensation. This just gives it up with no compensation. And SusanneRynders, can you show your analyses?
fail
heavyop wrote:
I'm always confused why there are people out there that think they can refute a mainline openings that GM's and strong computers like Rybka, Houdini and Fritz have spent years analyzing and playing. You'd think that its called a "mainline" because those are theoretically the best moves available...
You have a very good point there however you may find a nice novelty or 2 near a mainline when one side or the other makes a blunder.
Frankdawg wrote:
heavyop wrote:
I'm always confused why there are people out there that think they can refute a mainline openings that GM's and strong computers like Rybka, Houdini and Fritz have spent years analyzing and playing. You'd think that its called a "mainline" because those are theoretically the best moves available...
You have a very good point there however you may find a nice novelty or 2 near a mainline when one side or the other makes a blunder.
Too true but i seriously doubt there will be too many great novelties discovered that are in the first 10 or even 15 moves, especially in well established mainlines in popular openings
Jun 10, 2011
0
#29
okay, sorry. :) didnt realize. but i still think this line has plenty of juice and bite in it. Its a very trappy line anyways
the answer to the poster: read *my system* by aron nimzowitsch. where he says a chess player should never go for winning a pawn in the opening before developing his pieces. a good example of this principle is in the ruy lopez where black is free to takes white's e-pawn for several moves but chooses to develope his pieces instead
just joking RD
Jun 10, 2011
0
#33
Clouseau741 wrote:
Traxlerman does something admirable.HE ANALYSES.
He found something he believes it's good and he works on it.It doesn't matter if he never refutes any line and it doesn't matter even if his analysis is correct or wrong.What matters is that he doesn't afraid to share it and expose himself to all kind of nasty bad-purposed comments.
I saw your games Traxlerman , and although it is obvious you need a lot of work it is also obvious that lots of times you play much better than your rating.I can understand now why.
Keep on trying refuting the main lines.You will never make it but be sure that it will be very beneficial for many reasons.
Chess needs the courage to doubt everything.
Thank you :) Ive been in a slump lately, and I think im starting to come out of it. Im a very creative player and am especially fascinated with the openings. While this idea doesnt refute anything it adds a fearsome blitz weapon to blacks sicilian repertoire. Thats what I believe right now.
Jun 10, 2011
0
#34
I will. What is your opinion on my idea? Is it at least tricky? I think so, but what do I know? your rating is like, amazing
Jun 11, 2011
0
#35
I think so too. The most "Obvious" moves dont always work, and when it comes to OTB blitz, especially some blitz tournamtent, it should work great. I named it after me, seeing as I couldnt even find it in Eric Schillers book Unorthodox Chess Openings.
This line is so interesting. The fact is white is playing very solid and not giving black a whole lot to shoot at. Plus the queen might be chased away with b2-b4. However, black can come back to c7 and play a Kan a tempo down, while whites knight is not on c3 where he wants it, plus b4 gives something for black to look at. Either way its a much more solid line then the other crazy tactical stuff
I know Bd3 is playable but for the guys who like playing Be2 I showed the Bd2 version of what I believe would happen.