03 Jan 12
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.
03 Jan 12
Originally posted by RBHILLActually on move 34 I'd play Nf4.
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.
03 Jan 12
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!
03 Jan 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI was trying for a reverse sicilian.
[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!
03 Jan 12
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI think Bent Larsen could play like this, but it's a lot tougher for we mortals. That said, I love the bold play.
[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!
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.
03 Jan 12
1 edit
Originally posted by RBHILLthen you play, 1.c4, 2.Nc3 3.g3 5.Bg2 just two pawn moves max and you have two
I was trying for a reverse sicilian.
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!
03 Jan 12
2 edits
Originally posted by Paul Leggettmmm it is interesting, how can one exploit whites lack of development? mmm i would
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.
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.
03 Jan 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieImmediately I'd probably take advantage of the light squared weakness with ...e4 if white tries to challenge with d3 then I'd play ...d5.
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.
03 Jan 12
Originally posted by tomtom232yeah i was thinking of ...e4 but the problem with it is, white is not planning on putting
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.
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!