Maybe you are just better than Portisch Ponz ? Everyone knows what a hack he was !
Why are you constantly harassing Ponz when there are several idiots running rampant here that you could put down with your chess knowledge?
That's a very valid question, but the answer is really easy.
Arguing with ponz about chess has its charm. He will give you some interesting answers, although you wouldn;t accept him escaping from his stereotypes- that is normal, and expected. he is right to a certain extent about the importance of openings for HIS game, but have in mind that he plays correspondence, not OTB, and in correspondence the opening has an elevated role.
But arguing about chess with, say, 5OS or xpatzerx, is like reading poetry to a cockroach.
The fact of the matter is Pfren can't put me down with his chess knowledge simply because my statement was based on an interpretation of a quote.
Incantevoleutopia If you believe having 2 little red letters next to Pfren's name qualifies him in having super human powers to figure out how every chess player will interpret a quote than you are more delusional than Pfren.
Furthermore, When I do say something chess related they often are in a form of a question and/or opinion. In which case even then Pfren can't put me down with his chess knowledge because every person is allowed to ask a question and/or is entitled to their own opinion.
The real victim in this forum is PossibleOatmeal. Who got cyberbullyed for having an opinion. Which was perfectly justifiable.
Furthermore, Pfren has already acknowledged his own error with out me even telling him anything. You see I don't have to comment to Pfren. In fact, I have him blocked.I have found if you leave him to his own devices he will make the errors by himself. You just have to be their to collect them to show the evidence.
For example:
He has been trying to agrue about the below Portisch quote.
Your only task in the opening is to reach a playable middlegame. - Lajos Portisch
Yet read the the below quote from him.
Arguing with ponz about chess has its charm. He will give you some interesting answers, although you wouldn;t accept him escaping from his stereotypes- that is normal, and expected. he is right to a certain extent about the importance of openings for HIS game, but have in mind that he plays correspondence, not OTB, and in correspondence the opening has an elevated role.
The only task in the opening is to reach a playable middlegame? Oh wait that only applys to OTB and not correspondence by Pfren's standards.
I like how these exceptions are being added onto a quote which only has 12 words on it.
Portisch never said anything about correspondence chess.
Your only task in the opening is to reach a playable middlegame. - Lajos Portisch
We might as well rewrite the whole bloody thing.
"Your only task in the opening is to reach a playable middlegame unless your opponent blunders a mate in 1, hangs a piece, plays you in correspondence chess, plays you in vote chess." - Lajos Portisched corrected!
Absurd!
bb , I'm not disagreeing with you but am disagreeing that 1 d4 opens lines for more pieces than does 1 e4 .
I'm sorry, I wasn't clear. I meant that Berliner argued that 1.d4 d5 2.c4 opens more useful lines than 1.e4 e5 2.f4 does.