About 1. and 2. ,it is common in the cheese.com community, as both of us have noticed. They go for Scholar's Mate, and I am really annoyed.
The chess world is all white.
About 1. and 2. ,it is common in the cheese.com community, as both of us have noticed. They go for Scholar's Mate, and I am really annoyed.
The chess world is all white.
Well Scholar's mate is easily avoided, I can not imagine more advance players only playing as white.
Just a chicken turd would insist on playing as white all the time. They're so insecure, they always want an advantage.
I think #5 probably costs them more games than almost anything due to their false sense of security with no king safety.
WHen I sit down in a friendly OTB match I set myself as black (though I prefer white) just for an air of confidence and intimidation.
I do that with my friends who are much worse at chess than I. Comparing their play to mine, I'd say the 2 best players are probably around 1000 and the worst is 500 - 800, but I'm officially 1232 on live (which is probably a little low), so I feel that giving them the slight advantage is nice. I don't like opening with 1. e4 (or 1... e5), so that's usually what I do against the worst one. Maybe I'll try 1. f4 next time.
Ever run into those players who only play as white? There are some players I've played several times, and it seems like I always have the black pieces, so, out of curiosity I look at their game archives and see that all of their games are as white. Then there have been some that refuse rematches and say "I only play as white." Does this hamper their development?
I think it's hurtful. I've felt that looking at a game, or losing a game, with strong play by white helps me see some different ideas for white as well as some flaws in my thinking as black. Then when I look at strong play from black, I feel that it helps to find different ideas for black and ideas of what to watch out for as white.
Something else that seems harmful to their progress, and probably worst than just playing white, seems to be these common factors:
1. 2. Qd1-Any (most commonly 2. Qh5 or Qf3), which is commonly followed with 3. Bc4
2. Trying to force an early win by attacking f7
3. Ramming kingside pawns down my throat with little or no development (i.e. After the queen, king's bishop and king's knight are moved they play h4 followed by g4)
4. Passivity after fending off their early attacks (i.e. a3 as an answer to Nc6 when Nb4 achieves nothing)
5. Completely ignore castling because their attack is so strong that they're invincible! This is by far the most common of these 5.
So, harmful or not? If so, which is more harmful, playing one color with the complete exclusion of others or always playing the same way?