Some people have enough free time to waste on countless comments, but don't have time to google the main line
The personality of a Petrov's Defence player
Sort:
[COMMENT DELETED]
Feb 7, 2017
0
#24
I think the Petroff is boring to GMs because they know everything but for everyone else there's mastercard... erm.,. I mean it can be really complicated. Positions like these are not at all simple imo:
alexm2310 wrote:
VladimirHerceg91 wrote:
alexm2310 wrote:
Hey Vlad do you take requests?
What are you trying to say alexm2310?
I wanna know your thoughts on noble openings for courageous players, like the halloween gambit or the wayward queen. Thanks.
Depending on public demand I might do a series on courageous, and creative openings once I'm done exposing passive openings, and the cowardice of those who employ such openings.
Firethorn15 schreef:
An example of a Petroff game:
Thank you Firethorn. I play the Petrov and I won many many games with it. Also in attacking style like this. Mostly it is much more enteraining then for example a Berlin endgame of the Spanish.
Wow now this is exciting, ... not! Give me the Petrov!
alexm2310 wrote:
Can't wait
You may have to wait for a long time, there are many openings to first expose still. I was going to do a Caro-Kann thread, but surprisingly in 1500 blitz games, it's not once been played against me.
micky1943 wrote:
There's nothing more educational than reading what a weak, but pompously overconfident, buffoon has to say about chess openings that he clearly doesn't understand. It's almost as if the Dunning-Kruger effect has taken human form
Please if you have nothing meaningful to add to the discussion don't say anything at all. By the way, there is an off-topic section where you can flex your knowledge of psychology.
Feb 7, 2017
0
#29
Optimissed wrote:
Just shows that maybe 5. Nc3 isn't all that good?
It's one of the sole reasons the Petroff isn't played more apart from the Berlin being a thing.
OP, Your poor atempts at trolling are bad, but not as bad your game record as black. You lose 54% of all blitz games you play as black. The only thing you can really be an authority on when it comes to chess defense is how NOT to play them, rather than how to play them.
Erdal87 wrote:
OP, Your poor atempts at trolling are bad, but not as bad your game record as black. You lose 54% of all blitz games you play as black. The only thing you can really be an authority on when it comes to chess defense is how NOT to play them, rather than how to play them.
Only 54%? That's not bad at all, quite impressive actually. Thanks for sharing that.
I wouldn't exactly be proud of it. especially since you won 53% of the games you played as white. Your defense game is severely lacking compared to your attack.
I wouldn't exactly be proud of it. especially since you won 53% of the games you played as white. Your defense game is severely lacking compared to your attack.
Erdal87 wrote:
I wouldn't exactly be proud of it. especially since you won 53% of the games you played as white. Your defense game is severely lacking compared to your attack.
So you're saying that I'm a really good attacking player, like Tal for example?
VladimirHerceg91 wrote:
Comparing you to Tal, even ironically, would be sacrilege and insulting to his very name and legacy. I'll tell you what, I challenge you to a game , how aboit that?
Erdal87 wrote:
I wouldn't exactly be proud of it. especially since you won 53% of the games you played as white. Your defense game is severely lacking compared to your attack.
So you're saying that I'm a really good attacking player, like Tal for example?
Erdal87 wrote:
VladimirHerceg91 wrote:
Erdal87 wrote:
I wouldn't exactly be proud of it. especially since you won 53% of the games you played as white. Your defense game is severely lacking compared to your attack.
So you're saying that I'm a really good attacking player, like Tal for example?
Comparing you to Tal, even ironically, would be sacrilege and insulting to his very name and legacy. I'll tell you what, I challenge you to a game , how aboit that?
I only play 3 minute blitz, I don't have the patience for those daily games.
3 minute blitz it is, I myself loath the daily chess.
alexm2310 wrote:
It's not me who's writing posts as though I'm qualified authority on chess defense though. Especially since he referes to people who play the french defense as "unimaginative" and claims they rely on "cheap trick" rather that beeing genuinely good chess players. I know he mostly writes posts that are obvious bait and nothing more. I still believe someone who writes such absurd posts should be able to back up his claim with some sort of actual merit.
Erdal you're like 2 points better get over yourself
im playing the petroff. just started now
Optimissed wrote:
OK I just been to our local chess club. I was playing a 2175 FIDE, it was two wins each at 15 minutes rapidplay and I decided to play 1 e4, for a change. Then I found I was in a Petrov so guess what, I played the Cochrane. Only to discover that he'd got hammered by an I.M. in the Cochrane, so he'd analysed it carefully. I went 4 Nxf7 and he played c6 followed by g6. It seems the Cochrane Gambit is now completely busted. I couldn't get close to him after he centralised his queen.
The Cochrane gambit might work on somebody that's below 1000 ELO. I would never have tried it against an IM.
I used to love playing against the Petrov. Sometimes used to play a main line .... at others, the Cochrane Gambit otb longplay. Used to win with the Cochrane and win with the main line.
Which main line? We've discussed like 3. And according to shedinjas the official main line actually ends in a draw, so therefore not winnable