Originally posted by KorchWell, most gambits take a certain amount of bravery too, but the c3 is definately not brave. It minimises blacks counterplay to an extreme and turns the whole game into a struggle for any initiative at all, rather then the explosive main lines where a single move can win or lose the game.
If you are trying to say that only players who plays main line Sicilian are brave, then I can say - Its absolute BS.
Originally posted by KorchWell, it's true that it can't be generalized and one can be "brave" even with 2. c3. Anyway, such classifications are meaningless. What really matters is if you play the best move or what works best for you. However, it is really the main lines that are most challenging and embody an uncompromising fighting spirit.
If you are trying to say that only players who plays main line Sicilian are brave, then I can say - Its absolute BS.
Originally posted by TyrannosauruschexTyrannosauruschex is a knight who says Ni!
Well, most gambits take a certain amount of bravery too, but the c3 is definately not brave. It minimises blacks counterplay to an extreme and turns the whole game into a struggle for any initiative at all, rather then the explosive main lines where a single move can win or lose the game.
Originally posted by TyrannosauruschexAccording to your logic only sharp tactical players are brave, but positional players - not. You are mixing individual style with moral qualities.
Well, most gambits take a certain amount of bravery too, but the c3 is definately not brave. It minimises blacks counterplay to an extreme and turns the whole game into a struggle for any initiative at all, rather then the explosive main lines where a single move can win or lose the game.
1 edit
Originally posted by exigentskyI think that each player must play what is working (or should work) the best for him. Other things (as "brave" or "more challenging" ) are not important.
Well, it's true that it can't be generalized and one can be "brave" even with 2. c3. Anyway, such classifications are meaningless. What really matters is if you play the best move or what works best for you. However, it is really the main lines that are most challenging and embody an uncompromising fighting spirit.
3 edits
Originally posted by TyrannosauruschexIt`s banal stereotype which has nothing common with reality. Also positional players have been played "going for all or nothing".
Well the positional player is the sort who knows he can bail out with a draw if things are not going so well. A tactician goes for all or nothing so has to be more brave as every move could be his last.
Maybe, but mostly it is "all or draw" for the positional player.
Although I got skanked today in the national league playing an exchange ruy lopez, that is supposed to be quite a positional opening but it is amazing how good blacks white square bishop can become.
In future, that bishop will be my number 1 priority to get rid of.
Originally posted by TyrannosauruschexYou're still a knight who says Ni!
Maybe, but mostly it is "all or draw" for the positional player.
Although I got skanked today in the national league playing an exchange ruy lopez, that is supposed to be quite a positional opening but it is amazing how good blacks white square bishop can become.
In future, that bishop will be my number 1 priority to get rid of.