19 Apr '11 12:05>
Originally posted by greenpawn34Serves 'em right, the jammy gits.
And what about ambidextrous people?
They have to play 1.e4 and 1.d4 at the same time.
They will sit there unable to make up their minds and lose on time.
Richard
Originally posted by greenpawn34Yeah, believe them, they're from Scotland... solid and trustworthy like John Law!
"....the best way to avoid getting mugged is to not walk down
the dark alley in the first place."
Play 1.e4 and soon you will be one of the muggers who dwell in the dark alley.
It's OK. You will be safe. We don't mug each other. No need.
Originally posted by nimzo5I think the question is a good one:
It doesn't matter, it is still part of the opening phase. It isn't like you removed blunders from your stats you posted.
Originally posted by EladarEladar-
I think the question is a good one:
Is the opening to be punished because some people use it poorly?
It is a fundamental problem with such stats. As you pointed out earlier, if a great player uses it, then the stats look great! If a poor player uses it, then it looks poor.
My position is that there are very few of us who are after chess' great trut ...[text shortened]... way guarantees great results, nor does it guarantee improvement. You are selling snake oil.
Originally posted by greenpawn34I think the fact that you are talking with those chess learners helps them most. You give them the idea, then get to point out how they didn't apply it so that they can eventually see the problem and correct it.
You are correct Eladar. It's just all fun and seekers of the truth
in the opening often get blown up in the middle game.
Blunders come at any stage of the game and I believe you must
make every blunder before you can say you are aware of it.
I can tell a 100 people beware of snatching a loose pawn that leaves
a piece unprotected and a check in ...[text shortened]... u venture into a
tactical stramash from a 1.e4-e5 opening. It's a great learning playground.
Originally posted by ThabtosPretty common in weekend swiss events to see Master's deviate very early to force their 1600 opponent work out their own moves. These games rarely get collected into a database so your best way to see these type of games is Simuls.
When you look at the DB figures, has anyone ever though at the possibility that a master could play 1.a3 and probably have the same excellent results? Being masters and all? Especially as there are only a few of them, so they HAVE to play some much weaker players a lot.
Originally posted by EladarNot to get involved too much, but if you quote a post and then write something, which implies that it is a comment on the quotation, then please form some kind of logical connection between the two...
1) You were the one who attempted to use stats to prove 1.b3 is no worse than 1.e4 for results. Now you are backpedaling that multiple people have found issue with your claim.
No, I said that each move had its good points and bad points.
2) Probably most casual 1000-1500 rated players just play for fun- but then again, many of the people wh ideas. You'll just get to see the ideas of those who have ideas just as bad as yours.