@qrayons, how is learning about the Hobbs gambit in the Bird opening going to help someone, anyone for that matter, become a stronger chess player?
You missed his point. It isn't that the Hobbs gambit is supposed to make someone a stronger chess player. The point in that example is that the Hobbs offers something that isn't already covered by other blogs.
Robbie, I am very happy that you have begun to study logic and are learning about ad hominems and straw man fallacies. I am sure that once you learn about the complex question fallacy, then you will understand why I didn't answer your question.
I have not begun to study anything and once again i repeat, the thread is not about me, what it is actually about . . . .(and the clue is in the title) is chess players obsessions with chess openings, as was reflected in the blog posts at the time. Why this should be difficlut to grasp i cannot say?
First of all the thread is not about me, ad hominem (at the man) arguments are cannon fodder, secondly the argument you are making is a straw man, for you are basing your argument on values that i do not profess, two logical fallacies in one ill conceived argument does not bode well for you.
I have not stated nor assumed that a bloggers cheif criteria is in selecting a topic to write about which will help someone else improve their strength, I fully acknowledge that people blog for entertainment or some other purpose.
Secondly I have merely asked you how learning about the Hobbs gambit will improve someone's chess strength, which you have yet to answer. If you cannot nor will not answer then fine, so be it, hum ho, life goes on. If the answer is no it will not improve their chess strength then why should a chess player consider it, (please note the use of the term why? it usually demands a reason) if the answer is yes they will get something from it, then please explain what? thanks in advance robbie.