LeonSKennedy992 wrote:
MiloYiannopouIos wrote:
zzz
I don't want to insult you. Please do me and others a favor and leave this topic. You derailed an interesting discussion.
like this??
Should a beginner play d4 or e4 first?
Sort:
Sep 16, 2017
0
#143
MEXIMARTINI wrote:
This is a chess topic.
LeonSKennedy992 wrote:
MiloYiannopouIos wrote:
zzz
I don't want to insult you. Please do me and others a favor and leave this topic. You derailed an interesting discussion.
like this??
Sep 16, 2017
0
#145
LeonSKennedy992 wrote:
MiloYiannopouIos wrote:
rich family dont need to try
Can you do me a favor and leave this topic? It was a mature topic that was totally derailed by your childish antics.
Agreed... more the reason I stay off of these forums . They used to be informative.
Sep 16, 2017
0
#146
MEXIMARTINI wrote:
Has anyone watched idiocracy, the movie?.....I fear that has been happening for a LONG while.
LeonSKennedy992 wrote:
MiloYiannopouIos wrote:
zzz
I don't want to insult you. Please do me and others a favor and leave this topic. You derailed an interesting discussion.
like this??
Sep 16, 2017
0
#148
Anyway...fine. I'll bring it back. When I first started playing chess, I had no idea on what move to make first until I came on this site. Now, every time I play white, it's always E4. I feel weird if I even attempt another move other than E4.
Now, watching my son play, he does whatever move and it really doesn't seem to be a bother.
Sep 16, 2017
0
#149
I do have a question tho. When is it ever possible to do that one move where the pawn snakes another pawn if they are side by side?
Also, is it possible to set it up where this can happen every game? I would LOVE to learn that move. Seems so ninja to me
Sep 16, 2017
0
#150
MEXIMARTINI wrote:
I do have a question tho. When is it ever possible to do that one move where the pawn snakes another pawn if they are side by side?
Also, is it possible to set it up where this can happen every game? I would LOVE to learn that move. Seems so ninja to me
The move you are referencing is 'en passant'. Look up the rule.
It is a good rule as it helps prevent positionsl stagnation with dueling pawn walls. The reason it is not very common and thus the most obscure official rule is that the conditions required for it are not frequently conducive to optimal play.
Sep 16, 2017
0
#151
OK...first hit was a perfume...2nd hit, I got it. but, it only works if the opponent moves his/her pawn 2 spaces on first move?
Sep 16, 2017
0
#152
0sumPuzzlerDtoWL wrote:
MEXIMARTINI wrote:
I do have a question tho. When is it ever possible to do that one move where the pawn snakes another pawn if they are side by side?
Also, is it possible to set it up where this can happen every game? I would LOVE to learn that move. Seems so ninja to me
The move you are referencing is 'en passant'. Look up the rule.
It is a good rule as it helps prevent positionsl stagnation with dueling pawn walls. The reason it is not very common and thus the most obscure official rule is that the conditions required for it are not frequently conducive to optimal play.
okeeeeeee..lamen terms please??
Sep 16, 2017
0
#153
MiloYiannopouIos wrote:
LeonSKennedy992 wrote:
MiloYiannopouIos wrote:
zzz
I don't want to insult you. Please do me and others a favor and leave this topic. You derailed an interesting discussion.
I do enjoy derailing.
I also enjoy SCUFFLING
1v1 me bullet and if you win i leave ok?
You have been blocked 
Sep 16, 2017
0
#154
LeonSKennedy992 wrote:
universityofpawns wrote:
I think e4 is much easier to play as a beginner (and maybe also at advanced levels), and Bobby Fischer thought so too. E4 is sometimes also referred to as the Bobby Fischer move because it is the only move as either black or white that he always played. It occupies a center square with a pawn and also creates open lines for two pieces.
Fischer played a queen's gambit against SPASSKY in game 6 of the world chess championship match
I have linked the game here: http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1044366
It is a very interesting game. Enjoy!
In fact, it is one of the best games ever played. Spassky himself stood up in awe and applauded.
Yeah, that's a great game, but you must have looked really hard because I searched about 20 of his white games yesterday and they were all e4.
LeonSKennedy992 wrote:
CoachGunnar wrote:
this line is a bit annoying against the london, it essentially gives black a position without any bad pieces. Black will play like a french without a bad bishop, so it is quite pleasant. That being said, your points about the fact that there aren't really any traps against the london are very true- it's very easy to teach in as little as 10 minutes and it doesn't create any weaknesses out of the gate really.
EDIT: black is supposed to go d7-d5 also, somehow it wasn't in my annotation.
First off, I am honored that a NM commented in my topic. Thank you for the instructive feedback, sir.
I do agree, COMPLETELY, that there really are NOT any pitfalls if white plays the London System. On the other hand king pawn games tend to have lots of tactics and beginners are not too skilled when it comes to tactics.
Hey thanks! You're welcome
Well, there is this one trap that happens sometimes. As long as you know it though you'll be fine.
Something that some people don't seem to know: The london is essentially what happens if white plays the slav with an extra tempo. So, if you like the london a lot you may enjoy the slav defense as well!
Sep 16, 2017
0
#156
Yeah Bobby Fischer always ALWAYS played e4....that is why Spassky was sooo surprised in game 6 when he played d4. Spassky was totally taken aback psychologically and Fischer played a brilliant game.
It was here when Fischer realized that chess was quickly becoming ALL about preparation. It bothered him greatly.
Sep 16, 2017
0
#157
CoachGunnar wrote:
LeonSKennedy992 wrote:
CoachGunnar wrote:
this line is a bit annoying against the london, it essentially gives black a position without any bad pieces. Black will play like a french without a bad bishop, so it is quite pleasant. That being said, your points about the fact that there aren't really any traps against the london are very true- it's very easy to teach in as little as 10 minutes and it doesn't create any weaknesses out of the gate really.
EDIT: black is supposed to go d7-d5 also, somehow it wasn't in my annotation.
First off, I am honored that a NM commented in my topic. Thank you for the instructive feedback, sir.
I do agree, COMPLETELY, that there really are NOT any pitfalls if white plays the London System. On the other hand king pawn games tend to have lots of tactics and beginners are not too skilled when it comes to tactics.
Hey thanks! You're welcome
Well, there is this one trap that happens sometimes. As long as you know it though you'll be fine.
Something that some people don't seem to know: The london is essentially what happens if white plays the slav with an extra tempo. So, if you like the london a lot you may enjoy the slav defense as well!
I actually would NEVER take the d4 pawn with the knight. I always play c3 in response to black taking on d4. It IS a GAMBIT of a pawn, but I have found it gives white such powerful inititative. Also, stockfish says the position, even down a pawn after c3, is EQUAL. A beginner MUST be taught this little trick haha. AND again, thank you so much for your expertise and feedback. It is an HONOR, sir.
London sucks if you are a beginner.You need to play e4 if you want to improve like the fried liver and evans.It teaches you how your pieces work.London didn't have like e4 opening.
LeonSKennedy992 έγραψε:
Yeah Bobby Fischer always ALWAYS played e4....that is why Spassky was sooo surprised in game 6 when he played d4. Spassky was totally taken aback psychologically and Fischer played a brilliant game.
It was here when Fischer realized that chess was quickly becoming ALL about preparation. It bothered him greatly.
Ummm... Fisher did NOT play 1.d4 in game 6.
Spassky was not surprised, or something in that game- he was absolutely familiar with the opening (QGD Taratakower). For some odd reason he did not apply a very strong move shown to him by his seconds just months before the game... and the rest is history.
Sep 17, 2017
0
#160
pfren wrote:
he was absolutely familiar with the opening (QGD Taratakower). For some odd reason he did not apply a very strong move shown to him by his seconds just months before the game... and the rest is history.
In fact Spassky had some great statistic too like he hadn't lost a QGD Tartakower in 10 year or something like this. Spassky would have been 100% comfortable, but yes, he played an inaccuracy in the opening.
zzz