What the f*ck is going on here?!
Zurich 2015
Sort:
If I understand right, tiger6 is tryna prove being black 3 times in comparison to being white 3 times is not a disadvantage.
Sure it isn't! In case you are married with your opponent, of course.
Hah hah! :D
Hey, gotta go, tough day it was, champions one, so good night! :)
tigerprowl6 wrote:
Those percentages don't mean anything. How do we know if both sides played to the best of their ability and didn't take chances?
I think it's officially over with a normal conversation.
I provided you stats, I don't need maths.
Niño, the above is a database with more than a million games. The "third variable results" are meaningless since after so many games you can find them in both sides by equal.
Lol, 60 v 40, but no no no, hah.
tigerprowl6 escribió:
Pulpofeira wrote:
Niño, the above is a database with more than a million games. The "third variable results" are meaningless since after so many games you can find them in both sides by equal.
So, if a 2700 player plays a 2200 player, wins as white you are saying there has to be another game where a 2700 player plays a 2200 player as black?
Where do you get proof that this exists?
I would be more inclined to think white prepares better for a win and then takes a draw when they don't see an advantage, and black works toward a draw to only seek a win when they see an advantage.
This is a result of preparation, not fact. We don't randomly choose openings for players to play.
You can see that there are more draws in chess than wins and losses. No one is disputing that. Part of those draws come from black forcing the draw. They aren't working toward a win (as much) unless there is a discrepency in rating.
That is not what we see here though in top tournaments. So, you would expect more draws. Again, this is not because of an advantage of their chess playing, it would be more due to the player's preparation.
I'll cite the short Caruana win over Legrave at the Sinquefield tournament as an example.
And this is without playing white being an advantage...
Nakamura in the lead!!!
Being prepared is a more important difference, of course. But you can be sure all top players are being prepared. We're not talking about avoiding scholar's mate here.
I've never said being white confers a decisive advantage. I bet perfect play by both sides, if something like that exists, leads to a draw. But is more easy to play as white, is more easy to bring water to your mill.
Players are humans at the end, and after enough games you can expect more wins by white, as stats prove. That's the justification for Dutch game, Indian defenses or the Sicilian, for example. It's more safe to play d4 d5, but if black needs to win is forced to take more risks than white.
Even Bronstein, who for sure wasn't scared of play as black against anybody, said playing as white is much more easy.
PS: the above barely counts for players at my level, since there's a constant exchange of mistakes. But you, as a "top player", should already know it.
tigerprowl6 wrote:
Preparation can give you an advantage as white. Going first is not the advantage.
If black was equally prepared then it would be a draw.
We clarified this a long time ago, now go to sleep if you hadn't already, although China is a few hours in front of Europe and it should be evening there. Otherwise I'll ask fabelhaft to block you until Feb 18, because you don't seem to accept other opinions.
kco wrote:
lol.
Hah, am I not right? 
Feb 15, 2015
0
#57
MSC157 wrote:
kco wrote:
lol.
Hah, am I not right?
yep you're right, tigerprowl should have been remained muted and not be allow to create another account.
I stated you facts, you didn't seem to accept them, that's all. Simple f- fact. #51
"You mean easier, and now you are changing your position. Before you stated advantage, now you are saying easier".
I'm very sorry, tiger, English lessons aren't as good here as in China. And I'm not changing my position, is not an advantage to have an easier play?
Sorry, I meant *more likely.
Evidence? Here you go: