Ponz, if the ponziani was even close to refutable, I do not believe Carlsen would have tried it, especially given the era we live in.
It's just =, nothing more, nothing less
Ponz Says He Can Refute Ponziani!
Sort:
Sep 23, 2013
0
#23
I'm tracking this. Looking forward to updates.
Couldn't this be bad for sales though?
Count me in. You know I'm running Stockfish. Should be interesting. Looking forward to your challenge.
I'd be interested
Now I'm betting what Ponz wants to check out might rely on White responding 4. d4 to 3...Nf6. If so, White has other 4th moves. I'll go down the main line though, but even if Ponz thinks he's found a clear cut path to advantage for Black in that line, White could always fall back on 4. d3
LoekBergman wrote:
MSC157 wrote:
May I try? :) I was analysing it once as white. Also my grandgrandfather's friend was a GM (1...d6). If you know what I mean.
Who are you referring to? Pirc?
lol xD
What kind of game will be this one? A Vote Chess, or a normal Online Chess game?
LoekBergman wrote:
MSC157 wrote:
May I try? :) I was analysing it once as white. Also my grandgrandfather's friend was a GM (1...d6). If you know what I mean.
Who are you referring to? Pirc?
Yup, exactly him. :)
MSC157 you have to meet the requirements that you or your grandfather's friend knew a gm does not meet the requirements. sorry
FM Bluebird is in and I will add blumzovitch. now we have 4 and that is enough.
blumzovitch you are correct, I am not counting 3. c3 Nf6 4. d3 in this.
I will contact chess.com to try and get these 4 games started.
Sep 23, 2013
0
#32
What an interesting experiment! I don't think I'm strong enough, but I would be interested to see what happens :-)
ok we have trandom Expertise87 FM Bluebird1964 and blumozovich
I am contacting chess.com to get 4 unrated games going [using chess engines allowed and expected] I will try and fix it so the games can be viewed while in progress.
By the way all but trandom are in my Ponziani Analysis Group.
[hope I do not make a fool of myself]
Sorry, I was just joking (about participation here). Post the results afterwards.
UIUCBoss I am adding you as the 5th player He is part of my Ponziani Analysis Group
blast from the past.
goldendog wrote:
blast from the past.
Speaking of dogmatism....
Good to see you both back.
I'm perfectly happy with 3...Nf6 4.d4 ed4! 5.e5 Nd5 myself, no need to look further. It's also a complete answer to the Goring gambit- two birds with one shot.
4.d3 should not be too worrisome- after all 3...d5 4.Qa4 f6 5.d3 is at least as good- the queen will leave a4 at the most appropriate moment, while the pawn at f6 just obstructs Black's most natural development.
There are many defintions to "refute" an opening. I am contesting 5 very good players all with chess engine help [and I will use stockfish which I just acquired free on line] I will try and win from all 5.
Currently there is a variation that is very complicated to draw against the Ponziani, I ill try and do better than that.
I am waiting to get a response from chess.com. If no response we can just play via email and post results and games here. with a time delay so copying each other moves not possible. I am suggesting 3 days per move with no accumulation. You can respond quicker than 3 days. Does this make sense? Please any of the 5 respond? It has been a very long time since I have played like this. I might stagger the starts. Please do not compare games but you can look at the games on here but it will be a delayed game. Please give me suggestions as to the time control.
I meant for one of the games, there's a lot of collaboration plus a whole team of strong engine/software combinations. It might be too slow for you though, I don't think we'll play faster than 3 dpm.