Originally posted by greenpawn34
The point Fishcer was making has sailed right over your head.
Black does not play d5 it is committal - White now has something to do.
He can play around Black's d5.
[fen]rnbq1rk1/ppp1ppbp/3p1np1/8/8/3P1NP1/PPP1PPBP/RNBQ1RK1 w - - 0 6[/fen]
Here White has to think of something and Bobby reckons Black can react
in a favourable manner. It's the Zug hand to try and clear things up.
http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/extra/breyer.html
No it did not sail over my head, i just have my own mind and see no reason, no not
even the reason that Fischer gave to put ones queen pawn on queen three rather than
queen four where it belongs. I even demonstrated with reference why it was superior,
you may make reference to that. As for being committal? to put ones pawn on an
already protected square in the centre is committal? I think not, putting ones pawns
however on queen or king three is certainly no less committal, just ask any Frenchie!
But don't put moves he never played on the board?????? ill put moves wherever i like
Mr. Greenpawn! you may call it an act of vandalism, if you like! Its a sad day when
one cannot question why such and such a move was played, unless of course you
have a monopoly on the interpretation of chess positions?