You can find me on live. /challenge Aquarius550 45/45
No. I won't play a shorter time control.
Ain't nobody got time for that lol.
Then who are you to judge?
I've seen your attempts at "analysis."
You can find me on live. /challenge Aquarius550 45/45
No. I won't play a shorter time control.
Ain't nobody got time for that lol.
Then who are you to judge?
I've seen your attempts at "analysis."
Yes. I have too. I'm not that good yet.
Also, I wouldn't really care, but your refusal to accept criticism and toting around your faulty analysis as if it were gospel is rather disconcerting, lol.
Also, I wouldn't really care, but your refusal to accept criticism and toting around your faulty analysis as if it were gospel is rather disconcerting, lol.
Apparantly this is the case to a lot of people on the internet.
Also, I wouldn't really care, but your refusal to accept criticism and toting around your faulty analysis as if it were gospel is rather disconcerting, lol.
Apparantly this is the case to a lot of people on the internet.
Seems to me the common denominator is you in this particular argument.
Also, I wouldn't really care, but your refusal to accept criticism and toting around your faulty analysis as if it were gospel is rather disconcerting, lol.
Apparantly this is the case to a lot of people on the internet.
Seems to me the common denominator is you in this particular argument.
If I cared what random people on street thought then I would be quite disheartened there as well.
incantevoleutopia wrote:
Sophisticated trolling attempt or genuine fool, for this is the question.
Trolling. The faulty analysis is designed to elicit "dude, you don't know what you are doing..." reactions. In this case, this whole effort is probably to stir up challenges and then gain rating (probably via engine use), or lose rating, maybe even to just create an account in hurry that has a "history", to further some goal.
In <1 month this account is fast closing in on 500 games completed. Draw your own conclusions.
incantevoleutopia wrote:
Sophisticated trolling attempt or genuine fool, for this is the question.
Trolling. The faulty analysis is designed to elicit "dude, you don't know what you are doing..." reactions. In this case, this whole effort is probably to stir up challenges and then gain rating (probably via engine use), or lose rating, maybe even to just create an account in hurry that has a "history", to further some goal.
In <1 month this account is fast closing in on 500 games completed. Draw your own conclusions.
I'm not a troll. But think what you like.
Also, I wouldn't really care, but your refusal to accept criticism and toting around your faulty analysis as if it were gospel is rather disconcerting, lol.
Apparantly this is the case to a lot of people on the internet.
Seems to me the common denominator is you in this particular argument.
If I cared what random people on street thought then I would be quite disheartened there as well.
You know how you can tell when someone cares? When they are constantly telling you how much they dont care.
Also, I wouldn't really care, but your refusal to accept criticism and toting around your faulty analysis as if it were gospel is rather disconcerting, lol.
Apparantly this is the case to a lot of people on the internet.
Seems to me the common denominator is you in this particular argument.
If I cared what random people on street thought then I would be quite disheartened there as well.
You know how you can tell when someone cares? When they are constantly telling you how much they dont care.
Mm. Good point. In that case, I really care.
Thanks, but I already do.
You were actually off to a good start with mentioning black's most important piece but unfortunately 1.g4,Bxg4 isn't forced but your idea wasn't a bad one: 2.Nxd4,Bxe2 (the point of your deflection tactic) 3.Ncxe2 and white's up a piece. However, 1...Bxc3! the bishop is no longer threatened and 2.bxc3,Bxg4 and white is structurally busted while 2.gxf5,Bxe5 is better for black, but not as decisive as 2.bxc3??
The position is an open center, so centralized pieces are quite strong, therefore white wants to neutralize them with 1.Be3! there are tactical complications due to the tensions, so Bxe3, Bxe5, and Bxc3 are all possible.
But let's just say he does play g4. I'm always a fan of forcing a man back if I can, and I'm not too worried about king safety here because white's bishops are pointing toward the queenside. Yes be3 is simpler, but I don't know if I trust it, its too simple: for example 1. g4 bd3 2. Ng4 taking advantage of the fact that the bishop now has nowhere to go. The bishop has to go d2 and then you can play Ne4 with the idea of saccing the central knight at some point. If bg6 I would play h4 followed by a direct attack on the vulnerable black king. I like to attack so I would play g4, that's just me.
The thing is the center is open and black's pieces are well placed, so it's up to white to neutralize that advantage. Also, moving flank pawns with an open center is typically a bad idea. Steinitz said the side with the advnatage has the right to attack, so it's time for white to employ defensive tactics. 1.Be3! isn't that simple, there's lots of tension in the position though things will clarify later. It's up to white however to calculate it to ensure it works: We know 1.Bd3?? is a blunder because 1...Bxd3 2.Qxd3,Bxf2+ 3.Rxf2,Qxd3 loses the queen. After 1.Be3,Bxe3 2.fxe3! (white shouldn't be afraid of creating an extra pawn island here as the semi open f-file has some value for white and the Bd4 was strong enough where it's worth accepting) white has a good position, the d4 square looks good for his knight while a queenless middlegame with 2...Qxd1 3.Raxd1 favors white as he has a good initiative as he can force black on the defense with 3...Be6 4.Nd5!,Rac8 5.Nf4,Bg4 6.e6!,Bxe6 7.Nxe6 and as the endgame draws near white will be more than ready as black has enough weaknesses and entry points to be ripe with the principle of two weaknesses with a position that lends itself to clear schematic thinking, and with bishop and knight vs. two knights white has a clear advantage being able to cover more of the board, exchanging a set of knights should be one of white's mini plans.
As for 1.Be3,Bxc3 2.bxc3 white's pawns are busted, but the c3 pawn actually restricts black's pieces and can't be realistically exploited by black. White's bishop pair is worth more than the isolated doubled pawns are weak here.
However, instead of those lines black did even worse with 1...Bxe5?! simply giving up the bishop without compensation to win a pawn white intended to sacrifice at some point anyway: 2.Nxe5,Nxe5 3.Qb3! and Korchnoi as white obtained an advantage keeping queens on the board, making threats, and exploiting his bishop pair in an open position.
Sophisticated trolling attempt or genuine fool, for this is the question. In the meantime, let me offer you a yogurt -