Weaning myself off 1. b3 - Chess Forums - Page 3

Irontiger

Jul 4, 2014

0

#41

trotters64 wrote:

joelseymour wrote:

trotters64 - Anderssen's 1. a3

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chesscollection?cid=1004449

pfren was not seriously suggesting i play a3 ; he was just being the usual sarcastic jerk off that he is.

I wouldn't be so sure. 1.a3 is certainly better than you imagine.

And considering you are the one starting insults, there is no difficulty seeing who could claim the choice of weapons for the duello. (I think he will choose wits)

trotters64

Jul 4, 2014

0

#42

pfren wrote:

Of course I was seriously suggesting 1.a3: it's surely enough not worse than 1.b3. Factly, my shortest loss as Black is on something closely resembling 1.a3:

Both sides did not play terribly accurately in that game, but this does not mean much. For the record, the guy playing white is the vice-president of FIDE, IM with two GM norms by that time.

A quasi-GM does not mind starting his games with 1.a3, but PatzerTrotters does. Oh well...

Of course 1.a3 is inferior to 1.b3. at least 1. b3 allows the development of the dark squared bishop . I have never seen a supergm play 1.a3 but nakamura played 1. b3 at the 2013 london chess classic and won the tournament.I dont change my original thought ..your suggested 1. a3 is a piece of warped humour.Incidentally the game you paste is not quite 1. a3 is it and I suggest that that is an important consideration.Nonetheless thx for your input howsoever it is intentioned.

trotters64

Jul 4, 2014

0

#43

Irontiger wrote:

trotters64 wrote:

joelseymour wrote:

trotters64 - Anderssen's 1. a3

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chesscollection?cid=1004449

pfren was not seriously suggesting i play a3 ; he was just being the usual sarcastic jerk off that he is.

I wouldn't be so sure. 1.a3 is certainly better than you imagine.

And considering you are the one starting insults, there is no difficulty seeing who could claim the choice of weapons for the duello. (I think he will choose wits)

what a disgusting piece of witless work you are..i suggest that you consult your doctor to see if a personality transplant might somehow be available for you you witless wonder..if not , well you have my sympathies.

Irontiger

Jul 4, 2014

0

#44

trotters64 wrote:

Of course 1.a3 is inferior to 1.b3. at least 1. b3 allows the development of the dark squared bishop . I have never seen a supergm play 1.a3 but nakamura played 1. b3 at the 2013 london chess classic and won the tournament.

Nakamura is also known for repeatedly firing the Parham (1.e4 e5 2.Qh5), which must be taken in consideration when assessing your authority argument.

I know I should not encourage you to abuse people by rewarding you with chess analysis, but the thing that a3 accomplishes is playing with Black with the inclusion of ...a6, which makes a significant difference in a lot of lines. It is a transposition trick.

For instance: 1.a3

1...e5 2.c4 Ding! Sicilian with one more useful tempo!

1...d5 2.Nf6 c5 3.c4 Ding! Benoni!

trotters64

Jul 4, 2014

0

#45

Irontiger wrote:

trotters64 wrote:

Of course 1.a3 is inferior to 1.b3. at least 1. b3 allows the development of the dark squared bishop . I have never seen a supergm play 1.a3 but nakamura played 1. b3 at the 2013 london chess classic and won the tournament.

Nakamura is also known for repeatedly firing the Parham (1.e4 e5 2.Qh5), which must be taken in consideration when assessing your authority argument.

I know I should not encourage you to abuse people by rewarding you with chess analysis, but the thing that a3 accomplishes is playing with Black with the inclusion of ...a6, which makes a significant difference in a lot of lines. It is a transposition trick.

For instance: 1.a3

1...e5 2.c4 Ding! Sicilian with one more useful tempo!

1...d5 2.Nf6 c5 3.c4 Ding! Benoni!

all i would say is this..would any chess teacher receiving fees encourage his student to play a3? i ask you would they.?.i think not.. now ,there is a great danish player named bent larsen who played b3 regularly with great success ,bobby fischer also played it with success..you will really have to go some to convince me that a3 and b3 are of equal merit.on aesthetic grounds alone a3 is just ugly.

joelseymour

Jul 4, 2014

0

#46

trotters64 wrote:

I like playing the Nimzo Larsen as white because you can get into some nice tactical lines if all goes well. However, all doesn't go well as often as I would like it.

I have a 33% win ratio when playing 1.b3 but a 55% win ratio when playing 1.e4 or 1.d4. It seems obvious that I should not play 1. b3 but I think I am a little addicted to it as it creeps back every now and then ..any constructive suggestions are most welcome.

You might want to consider 1. Nf3 because white hasn't shown his hand. After 1. Nf3, you will probably encounter ...1 Nf6, ...1d5, ...1c5, ...1g6 or ...1f5 the most. The best of luck.

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1070716

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1143926

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1111360

*****This was suggested to you on page one and you showed no interest. 1. Nf3 is played at every level.*****

odisea777

Jul 4, 2014

0

#47

plunge your hand into a pot of boiling water every time you open with b3.

JGambit

Jul 4, 2014

0

#48

trotters64 wrote:

Irontiger wrote:

trotters64 wrote:

joelseymour wrote:

trotters64 - Anderssen's 1. a3

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chesscollection?cid=1004449

pfren was not seriously suggesting i play a3 ; he was just being the usual sarcastic jerk off that he is.

I wouldn't be so sure. 1.a3 is certainly better than you imagine.

And considering you are the one starting insults, there is no difficulty seeing who could claim the choice of weapons for the duello. (I think he will choose wits)

what a disgusting piece of witless work you are..i suggest that you consult your doctor to see if a personality transplant might somehow be available for you you witless wonder..if not , well you have my sympathies.

lol I call trotters out for his lack of wit and he decides its such a good insult that he trots it out himself.

JGambit

Jul 4, 2014

0

#49

owltuna wrote:

I've never heard of either of these two guys, but their ratings look kinda high, do they qualify as "supergm's?"

Nakamura and bent Larsen are both known for playing crap at times just for the fun of winning with stuff they shouldn't. I would need an example of Fischer playing b3 that was against an opponent he respected.

The guy above actually has a point.

trotters64

Jul 4, 2014

0

#50

JGambit wrote:

trotters64 wrote:

Irontiger wrote:

trotters64 wrote:

joelseymour wrote:

trotters64 - Anderssen's 1. a3

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chesscollection?cid=1004449

pfren was not seriously suggesting i play a3 ; he was just being the usual sarcastic jerk off that he is.

I wouldn't be so sure. 1.a3 is certainly better than you imagine.

And considering you are the one starting insults, there is no difficulty seeing who could claim the choice of weapons for the duello. (I think he will choose wits)

what a disgusting piece of witless work you are..i suggest that you consult your doctor to see if a personality transplant might somehow be available for you you witless wonder..if not , well you have my sympathies.

lol I call trotters out for his lack of wit and he decides its such a good insult that he trots it out himself.

and here was I hoping that the there might be a few souls out there who would recognise irony when they saw it..not yet at least anyways.

rTist21

Jul 4, 2014

0

#51

pfren wrote:

Play 1.a3!.

Your problem is solved: Equally good to 1.b3, and much easier to handle.

Isn't 1. h3 just as good?

Prudentia

Jul 4, 2014

0

#52

trotters64 a écrit :

AlisonHart wrote:

I wouldn't ever call an International Master a failure at chess.....I have zero IM norms, so I'm going to go ahead and boldly say that pfren did something right.

IM pfren thinks it is ok to come onto threads to ridicule others for no good reason other than to satisfy his own warped sense of humour ..if pfren was not such a nasty piece of work in the first place then maybe others would not feel the need to remind him that to date he has failed to attain grandmaster status which is the goal of any serious chess player..this is not the first time that pfren has gratuitously attacked an innocent poster, he is a serial offender and needs to be called on it. others may feel too awestruck by his title to question his opinions , I am not.

The only serial offender with attacks and insults I see is you.

trotters64

Jul 4, 2014

0

#53

Prudentia wrote:

trotters64 a écrit :

AlisonHart wrote:

I wouldn't ever call an International Master a failure at chess.....I have zero IM norms, so I'm going to go ahead and boldly say that pfren did something right.

IM pfren thinks it is ok to come onto threads to ridicule others for no good reason other than to satisfy his own warped sense of humour ..if pfren was not such a nasty piece of work in the first place then maybe others would not feel the need to remind him that to date he has failed to attain grandmaster status which is the goal of any serious chess player..this is not the first time that pfren has gratuitously attacked an innocent poster, he is a serial offender and needs to be called on it. others may feel too awestruck by his title to question his opinions , I am not.

The only serial offender with attacks and insults I see is you.

I care nothing for your opinion but you are a woman so its difficult to insult you as I dont like to hurt a woman's feelings.

Prudentia

Jul 4, 2014

0

#54

trotters64 a écrit :

Prudentia wrote:

trotters64 a écrit :

AlisonHart wrote:

I wouldn't ever call an International Master a failure at chess.....I have zero IM norms, so I'm going to go ahead and boldly say that pfren did something right.

IM pfren thinks it is ok to come onto threads to ridicule others for no good reason other than to satisfy his own warped sense of humour ..if pfren was not such a nasty piece of work in the first place then maybe others would not feel the need to remind him that to date he has failed to attain grandmaster status which is the goal of any serious chess player..this is not the first time that pfren has gratuitously attacked an innocent poster, he is a serial offender and needs to be called on it. others may feel too awestruck by his title to question his opinions , I am not.

The only serial offender with attacks and insults I see is you.

I care nothing for your opinion ..so go and crawl back under your rock. you are boring.

It was an observation, not an opinion. Also, if you truely don't care about my illogically percieved 'opinion,' why did you even bother to post a reply? Not an opinion, just an honest question from an honest girl.

trotters64

Jul 4, 2014

0

#55

Prudentia wrote:

trotters64 a écrit :

Prudentia wrote:

trotters64 a écrit :

AlisonHart wrote:

I wouldn't ever call an International Master a failure at chess.....I have zero IM norms, so I'm going to go ahead and boldly say that pfren did something right.

IM pfren thinks it is ok to come onto threads to ridicule others for no good reason other than to satisfy his own warped sense of humour ..if pfren was not such a nasty piece of work in the first place then maybe others would not feel the need to remind him that to date he has failed to attain grandmaster status which is the goal of any serious chess player..this is not the first time that pfren has gratuitously attacked an innocent poster, he is a serial offender and needs to be called on it. others may feel too awestruck by his title to question his opinions , I am not.

The only serial offender with attacks and insults I see is you.

I care nothing for your opinion ..so go and crawl back under your rock. you are boring.

It was an observation, not an opinion. Also, if you truely don't care about my illogically percieved 'opinion,' why did you even bother to post a reply? Not an opinion, just an honest question from an honest girl.

I replied because you took the trouble to post your thoughts however disagreeable i found them to be. when i replied i did not realise you were a girl otherwise i would not have called you a snake.. you say that i am guilty of insulting people but i feel that i only insult those that have first of all insulted me ..it is of course ironic that your post itself was insulting.

DrCheckevertim

Jul 4, 2014

0

#56

You could always try 1. h4. Your opponent won't know how to defend such an early pawn flank. They will go into a panic and lose on time, which is the ultimate goal of blitz below GM level.

joelseymour

Jul 4, 2014

0

#57

DrCheckevertim wrote:

You could always try 1. h4. Your opponent won't know how to defend such an early pawn flank. They will go into a panic and lose on time, which is the ultimate goal of blitz below GM level.

trotters64: http://www.365chess.com/search_result.php?search=1&m=1&n=276&ms=h4&wid=28595

trotters64

Jul 4, 2014

0

#58

joelseymour wrote:

DrCheckevertim wrote:

You could always try 1. h4. Your opponent won't know how to defend such an early pawn flank. They will go into a panic and lose on time, which is the ultimate goal of blitz below GM level.

trotters64: http://www.365chess.com/search_result.php?search=1&m=1&n=276&ms=h4&wid=28595

Thank you Joel for pasting the link but I will definitely not be going for h4..not in this lifetime.thx all the same though.

Irontiger

Jul 5, 2014

0

#59

rTist21 wrote:

pfren wrote:

Play 1.a3!.

Your problem is solved: Equally good to 1.b3, and much easier to handle.

Isn't 1. h3 just as good?

Not by a landslide.

An extra ...a6 move is much, much more useful than an extra ...h6 move when playing Black.

IM pfren

Jul 5, 2014

0

#60

When I was very young, I liked Larsen's style very much. So, I began to play 1.b3 frequently, and stopped after a while because my results were very bad. Reason? Not that 1.b3 is a bad move, but simply because it does require very good positional understanding, which most class players lack.

Heck, even Larsen himself had some pretty good reasons to reconsider, after some painful losses- this one being rather humiliating:

(the comments come from the tournament bulletin- and getting mated as white in twenty moves is not particuraly inspiring, is it?).

On the other hand, 1.a3 is way easier to play: You just play your favorite Black systems as White, where the extra a2-a3 tempo might (or might not) prove useful.