Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. Standard member RBHILL
    Acts 13:48
    03 Jan '12 17:23
    Game 8943455

    This was one of my favorite wins.

    My only comments is that move 34 should be taken by pawn and not the bishop.
  2. 03 Jan '12 18:13
    Originally posted by RBHILL
    Game 8943455

    This was one of my favorite wins.

    My only comments is that move 34 should be taken by pawn and not the bishop.
    Actually on move 34 I'd play Nf4.
  3. 03 Jan '12 20:01
    Originally posted by RBHILL
    Game 8943455

    This was one of my favorite wins.

    My only comments is that move 34 should be taken by pawn and not the bishop.


    five moves in and white has not developed one piece, dubious, such a clear violation of
    chess principles should be rigorously punished, its the duty of all chess players to
    punish such blatant disregard for the principles of chess!
  4. Standard member RBHILL
    Acts 13:48
    03 Jan '12 20:24
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    [fen]rnbq1rk1/ppppbppp/5n2/4p3/1PP5/P3P1P1/3P1P1P/RNBQKBNR w KQ - 0 6[/fen]

    five moves in and white has not developed one piece, dubious, such a clear violation of
    chess principles should be rigorously punished, its the duty of all chess players to
    punish such blatant disregard for the principles of chess!
    I was trying for a reverse sicilian.
  5. Subscriber Paul Leggett
    Chess Librarian
    03 Jan '12 20:34 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    [fen]rnbq1rk1/ppppbppp/5n2/4p3/1PP5/P3P1P1/3P1P1P/RNBQKBNR w KQ - 0 6[/fen]

    five moves in and white has not developed one piece, dubious, such a clear violation of
    chess principles should be rigorously punished, its the duty of all chess players to
    punish such blatant disregard for the principles of chess!
    I think Bent Larsen could play like this, but it's a lot tougher for we mortals. That said, I love the bold play.

    One could also argue that moving pawns does develop pieces to an extent. The reason I mention it is that one time I read a Capablanca quote where he stated that giving pawn odds in a game isn't odds at all unless it involved the f-pawn, as giving up any other pawn constitutes a development advantage to the person with the missing pawn.

    The idea is that a pawn missing from it's original square allows easier development for the pieces that can pass through the square that much easier.

    The thought stuck with me because I was surprised to hear it from Capablanca, as I did not think he would consider the loss of a pawn in that way, but it's just another example of the well-rounded complexity of World Champions.
  6. 03 Jan '12 22:39 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by RBHILL
    I was trying for a reverse sicilian.
    then you play, 1.c4, 2.Nc3 3.g3 5.Bg2 just two pawn moves max and you have two
    pieces developed! I just purchased Kostens book on the English as i fancy having a go
    with it, my only reservation as that as a Scotsman, its brings up ancient prejudices!
  7. 03 Jan '12 22:46 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by Paul Leggett
    I think Bent Larsen could play like this, but it's a lot tougher for we mortals. That said, I love the bold play.

    One could also argue that moving pawns does develop pieces to an extent. The reason I mention it is that one time I read a Capablanca quote where he stated that giving pawn odds in a game isn't odds at all unless it involved the f-pawn, n that way, but it's just another example of the well-rounded complexity of World Champions.
    mmm it is interesting, how can one exploit whites lack of development? mmm i would
    be inclined to try to open up the position as quickly as possible. with say ..d5 and ...c5

    yes moving pawns does develop pieces in a kind of preparation for development, as
    for Capa's quote, i wonder if he had in mind the creation of half open files, which do
    constitute a kind of development for pieces, especially the rooks.
  8. 03 Jan '12 22:59
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    mmm it is interesting, how can one exploit whites lack of development? mmm i would
    be inclined to try to open up the position as quickly as possible. with say ..d5 and ...c5

    yes moving pawns does develop pieces in a kind of preparation for development, as
    for Capa's quote, i wonder if he had in mind the creation of half open files, which do
    constitute a kind of development for pieces, especially the rooks.
    Immediately I'd probably take advantage of the light squared weakness with ...e4 if white tries to challenge with d3 then I'd play ...d5.
  9. 03 Jan '12 23:13
    Originally posted by tomtom232
    Immediately I'd probably take advantage of the light squared weakness with ...e4 if white tries to challenge with d3 then I'd play ...d5.
    yeah i was thinking of ...e4 but the problem with it is, white is not planning on putting
    his knight on f3, hes planning on putting it on e2, still, it looks kind of right and worth
    considering me thinks, although it gives up a precious tempo which might be expended
    on an immediate ...d5 or ...c5, even sacrificing a pawn or two!