Originally posted by Dragon FireInstead of proving to use you can beat 1100 players with g4. a4, or h4, why don't you do something a little more impresive?
Following the successful trial of 1. h4 and the completion of a trial of 1. g4 nearing completion and producing equally comprehensive results I was wonderin if perhaps 1. a4 was a good alternative for those players who don't like creating weaknesses on their K-side and retain a perverted desire to castle.
If it is perhaps we can all soon forget about d4 or e5 and rewrite the world chess history.
Originally posted by ShinidokiNo! no! no! no!
Instead of proving to use you can beat 1100 players with g4. a4, or h4, why don't you do something a little more impresive?
like play the pork chop opening [hammerslaug] which is most noticeably reconised by 2.Kf2!
Originally posted by Dragon FireYet, Insist on playing 1100 rated players
No! no! no! no!
The point is 2. Kf2 is pointless and has no strategic merit what so ever, whereas both a4 and h4 get a key pawn that much closer to their queening square and opens files for the Rook. g4 is well recognised as a tactical masterstroke played by renouned players such as IM Michael Basman and includes amoung its victims Nunn. Speelman, Plaskett, Hebden and Arkell, good players all!
Originally posted by ShinidokiI just challenged players who moved fast as I wanted to finish the games in 48 hours. The fact that their ratings were low was coincidental. I made my replies instantly evening out the odds a bit.
Yet, Insist on playing 1100 rated players