Originally posted by robbie carrobieOh what a clype big time ye brought up from deep down inside that emptie skullie of yers!
Ha, King Bobby had no trouble, he was just thinking about his maws Findus crispy pancakes during the session and wondering how he was gonna get home, 1.d4=woosie!
So ye sleekit numpty trusty feer of mine, then why King Bobby was forced to accept the draw after just 47 moves? Do ye rrrrrrrreally imply that the King of crystal clear complications could not just keep up dreaming of his pankakes and at the same annihilate singlehanded that beastie skoosh addicted Lajos, ye one dot e four woosie?😵
Originally posted by zozozozoCorrect - you must react if your opponent is developing with
but this depends on your opponents moves.
You might not be able to fully develop the way you want because ull have to react to your opponents moves?
threats and hindering your own development.
If you do not jump on a bad opening move right away then the
chances are it will return to haunt you.
You are absolutely correct.
But in my example my opponent did nothing to stop me fully
developing, so I did.
My point was in too many games I've seen players squandering
developing opportunites by starting pre-mature tempo wasting
'attacks' that get easily knocked back with venom.
My thought process ran:
"What's he doing - nothing, I'll develop."
"What's he doing - nothing, I'll develop."
"What's he doing - nothing, I'll develop."
And it was not until I was fully 100% developed did I send a piece
into his half of the board and won 4 moves later.
The thought process among some players on here appears to be.
"What's he doing - nothing, I'll stop developing and attack"
They lose and so appear on the Forum asking for opening books
recomendations to get them into a middle game.
Let the theory of simple development be their opening book.
If in doubt, get a piece out.
(BTW. My Lopez unsound on 'principles' was a tongue in cheek post.)
Originally posted by greenpawn34Your though process should have been:
My thought process ran:
"What's he doing - nothing, I'll develop."
"What's he doing - nothing, I'll develop."
"What's he doing - nothing, I'll develop."
"What's he doing - nothing, can i harshly take advantage of that nothing? -> Not really; I'll develop."
"What's he doing - nothing, can i harshly take advantage of that nothing? -> Not really; I'll develop."
"What's he doing - nothing, can i harshly take advantage of that nothing? -> Not really; I'll develop."
But yeah, some take it to the extreme, look at this game that was posted a while ago, Move 2 and 3 and 5 of black all wasted on 1 piece lol
Originally posted by zozozozoThe noble 1.d4 2.c4 strategy serves perfectly the thought:
Your though process should have been:
"What's he doing - nothing, can i harshly take advantage of that nothing? -> Not really; I'll develop."
"What's he doing - nothing, can i harshly take advantage of that nothing? -> Not really; I'll develop."
"What's he doing - nothing, can i harshly take advantage of that nothing? -> Not really; I'll develop."
But ...[text shortened]... e that was posted a while ago, Move 2 and 3 and 5 of black all wasted on 1 piece lol
-- "I will get and control the best squares of the board with my pawns and my pieces regardless the reactions of my opponent and I will leave to him the weakest, and once the Blackie gets suffocated, ill-developed and stranded I will simply send him down the drain big time"
😵
Originally posted by greenpawn34Tarrasch was not aware of the fact that you can win solely through the accurate understanding and evaluation of the Time😵
One could argue that the Ruy Lopez is unsound based on principles.
[fen]r1bqkbnr/pppp1ppp/2n5/1B2p3/4P3/5N2/PPPP1PPP/RNBQK2R[/fen]
It develops a Bishop before a Knight.
Puts a piece on an unprotected square.
Does not really threaten to win the e-pawn. (3...a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. Nxe5 Qd4)
After 3...a6 you will be moving the Bishop twice in the openi ...[text shortened]... 'm reminded of a saying by Tarrasch.
"Every move you play is weakening, except Checkmate."
Originally posted by zozozozolol sorry, forgot to post the game
But yeah, some take it to the extreme, look at this game that was posted a while ago, Move 2 and 3 and 5 of black all wasted on 1 piece lol
Game 5885374
Originally posted by black beetleLol, i dare you beetle my friend, next game before your opening move, survey the board with your mind and in true Bronstein fashion, let you're imagination rove like the wind on the Hills of the Peloponnese and with trembling hand, pick up the e4 pawn and boldly place it on e4, for to be sure one may slide the d4 pawn forward lightly and gingerly with ones pinky as one would slide a cup of tea and a saucer full of dainty biscuits towards ones guest, but the e4 pawn, must be grasped stoutly and resolutely placed before our opponent as a triple dram of fine malt whiskey before our drouthy drinking companion! 😵
Oh what a clype big time ye brought up from deep down inside that emptie skullie of yers!
So ye sleekit numpty trusty feer of mine, then why King Bobby was forced to accept the draw after just 47 moves? Do ye rrrrrrrreally imply that the King of crystal clear complications could not just keep up dreaming of his pankakes and at the same annihilate singlehanded that beastie skoosh addicted Lajos, ye one dot e four woosie?😵
Originally posted by robbie carrobieOh ye up there from Bonnie Glasgow ye never quit😵
Lol, i dare you beetle my friend, next game before your opening move, survey the board with your mind and in true Bronstein fashion, let you're imagination rove like the wind on the Hills of the Peloponnese and with trembling hand, pick up the e4 pawn and boldly place it on e4, for to be sure one may slide the d4 pawn forward lightly and gingerly wit ...[text shortened]... re our opponent as a triple dram of fine malt whiskey before our drouthy drinking companion! 😵
Originally posted by black beetlelol, oh my trusty feer, just messing, i actually wish i had confidence to play them beautiful positional games of the queens gambit masters. our friend Ulysses tried to guide and teach me the ways and the paths, but it was too beautiful in conception for a Patzer more used to shooting tin cans with a shotgun than deftly aiming the arrow in artistic fashion from a well maintained bow!
Oh ye up there from Bonnie Glasgow ye never quit😵
lol tbh i disagree slightly ... altho it is sound advice.
I like experimenting in the opening, have plenty of disastarous games for it. but a few brilliant ones to.
Half the fun of chess is having odd out of pattern openings, Not rattling out the pieces and turning into a complex version of draughts.
the fried liver attack is fun , i don't really care if it's sound or not.
1 edit
Originally posted by greenpawn34Chess is easy. It takes only about 30 minutes to learn. It's winning that's hard 😉
It really is simple.
Play one touch chess in developing phase of the game.
That means every piece is move just once until every
other piece is developed.
Once fully developed then you can start playing chess.
First I pulled back my f4 London Bishop because I try not to
have unprotected pieces in the my position.
An auto re-action Bg3 h6 13. Ne5 Qc8 14.Nxf7 Kxf7 15. Qxe6+ Kf8 16. Qxe7+ Kg8 17. Bg6 Qf8 18. Qe6+[/pgn]
Here I have another game that fits your theme. I play the king's bishop gambit for exactly this reason, most players react as my opponent in that game, with Na5 he essentially wastes 1 tempo and loses.
Here it is: Game 6126515
Originally posted by zozozozoOh it's OK, back in them 80s when I was young enjoyin my coffey at Grasshoper whilst reading some early Keene and Marovic I was forgeting this and that all the time😵
lol sorry, forgot to post the game
Game 5885374
