Originally posted by Dragon Firewhat was the book saying about that line? drawish ? playable for black ?
I followed my book in this Game 2277047. By the time I realised it was lost it was too late, there was no salvation.
It wasn't me that lost! None of the moves were mine.
I could give a dozen similar examples were my book lines lost. I avoid those lines now but that is part of the learning process.
Books (and databases) can lead you down the wrong lines just as much as the correct ones.
Originally posted by Dragon FireYes, I've got an in progress game where I rejected grandmaster precedent for my own idea, partly because the games ended in draws and partly because I think I know better - I may find out I don't, but my move is based on what I saw in one of the games, and I think it might be possible to do better by playing the moves in a different order - although it's quite possible I'll simply find out I'm wrong.
I followed my book in this Game 2277047. By the time I realised it was lost it was too late, there was no salvation.
It wasn't me that lost! None of the moves were mine.
I could give a dozen similar examples were my book lines lost. I avoid those lines now but that is part of the learning process.
Books (and databases) can lead you down the wrong lines just as much as the correct ones.
The rest of this post is not in reply to DF:
Opening play in over the board chess is a mixture of using your built in database and when that runs out your opening nous in combination with your mental arithmetic analysis skills. In correspondence chess openings are a matter of research and analysis while playing the variations out on an analysis board.
There is no reason not to play on this site as if you were playing OTB, however it is not reasonable to expect your opponent not to. I've made the offer not to use databases in my profile as have a number of other players on the site. If you don't have a database then you have 4 options:
1) Do without.
2) Use one of a number of on-line ones (eg www.chessbase.com).
3) Buy one (eg at www.chessbase.com)
4) Do what I did and build one for yourself using free software and publicly available collections of games eg at www.chesscentre.com/twic.
There is really no point in moaning about people doing what the rules of the site allow.
Originally posted by Dragon FireThe line you followed from the Book is in theory better for Black then white. You lost when you when the game went out of book, so really it was your moves that lost the game.
I followed my book in this Game 2277047. By the time I realised it was lost it was too late, there was no salvation.
It wasn't me that lost! None of the moves were mine.
I could give a dozen similar examples were my book lines lost. I avoid those lines now but that is part of the learning process.
Books (and databases) can lead you down the wrong lines just as much as the correct ones.
Originally posted by AkashicIncorrect. I followed my book to move 14 by which time there was a forced mate for white. The book gave the winning method at which point I deviated but too late. If I'd played the line through rather than blindly following I may have realised in time.
The line you followed from the Book is in theory better for Black then white. You lost when you when the game went out of book, so really it was your moves that lost the game.
It was an old book unfortunately and newer books would have given the better lines for black.
Originally posted by Dragon Firei must be misreading something...
Incorrect. I followed my book to move 14 by which time there was a forced mate for white. The book gave the winning method at which point I deviated but too late. If I'd played the line through rather than blindly following I may have realised in time.
It was an old book unfortunately and newer books would have given the better lines for black.
there is a book line which leads to a forced mate on move 14?
Originally posted by Dragon FireI've checked this with Crafty and the line it gives on move 14 is: 14. ... Qe6 15. Bh6+ Ke7 16. Qg5+ Bf6 17. Rxf6 Qxf6 18. Re1+ Kf7 19. Qh5+ Qg6 20. Qf3+ Qf6 21. Qh5+ = in other words white had no more than a draw. By move 16 you were lost - Crafty assesses it at +7.29, there is no forced mate, but that isn't much consolation. If I gave the engine more time it might find a forced win.
Incorrect. I followed my book to move 14 by which time there was a forced mate for white. The book gave the winning method at which point I deviated but too late. If I'd played the line through rather than blindly following I may have realised in time.
It was an old book unfortunately and newer books would have given the better lines for black.
This was not a good line to choose, on my database, which is extensive but not exhaustive, there have been four games with 11. ... Bg7 and black lost them all.
Originally posted by Ruppster1It gets much worse than that,I was very sad to see blatant cheating by some athletes at the athletics track, they were using 'poles' (a long stick like thing) to enable them to jump higher!
Would those items be allowed in a FIDE tournament? If not why should they be allowed here?
1 edit
Originally posted by XanthosNZBook line starting from move 14 (which is where I deviated)
I suspect Dragon Fire doesn't know what forced mate means.
14. .. Qe6;
15. bd2 .. Kg8;
16. Rae1 .. QXQ;
17. Re8+ .. Bf8;
18. Bh6
1-0 Smirnov v Tikhonov, Moscow 1954.
The book "The Kings Gambit" by Viktor Korchnoi / Vladimir Zak was published in 1974 and has stood me in good stead but this game was one of the reasons I decided to get rid of all my old books although I cannot yet find a decent replacement for it. Had I deviated prior to move 14 salvation was still possible but those lines were not given.
I use this as an example only that following a book line / database is not always the advantage it is perceived to be and that blind faith can just as easily cause you to follow losing lines. If someone can find salvation for black after move 14 had I continued to follow the book it was not something I could find (without the benefit of an engine) and such line was not given in the book so the point I am trying to make is not negated here.
Originally posted by DeepThoughtI agree but no alternatives were given to Bg7 in the book I was using (but might be in a more recent book). This is the point I am trying to make. I am not saying there were not better alternatives but that following a book was not and never will be the salvation it is thought to be unless used with extreme care and understanding.
I've checked this with Crafty and the line it gives on move 14 is: 14. ... Qe6 15. Bh6+ Ke7 16. Qg5+ Bf6 17. Rxf6 Qxf6 18. Re1+ Kf7 19. Qh5+ Qg6 20. Qf3+ Qf6 21. Qh5+ = in other words white had no more than a draw. By move 16 you were lost - Crafty assesses it at +7.29, there is no forced mate, but that isn't much consolation. If I gave the engine more ...[text shortened]... nsive but not exhaustive, there have been four games with 11. ... Bg7 and black lost them all.
1 edit
Originally posted by Dragon FireLooks like you don't know what a forced mate is.
Book line starting from move 14 (which is where I deviated)
14. .. Qe6;
15. bd2 .. Kg1;
16. Rae1 .. QXQ;
17. Re8+ .. Bf8;
18. Bh6
1-0 Smirnov v Tikhonov, Moscow 1954.
The book "The Kings Gambit" by Viktor Korchnoi / Vladimir Zak was published in 1974 and has stood me in good stead but this game was one of the reasons I decided to get r ...[text shortened]... and such line was not given in the book so the point I am trying to make is not negated here.
EDIT: Also the line you posted doesn't make sense, the white king is on g1 already.
Originally posted by XanthosNZBlack king g8. Edited.
Looks like you don't know what a forced mate is.
EDIT: Also the line you posted doesn't make sense, the white king is on g1 already.
OK - forced mate or decisive material loss (leading to mate) but this sort of nit picking is not the point of this thread.
The point is following a database or book is not always a benefit
2 edits
The post that was quoted here has been removedhmm, I would argue that you overstate the case. It will not make a 1200 level player a 2000+ player but I find that it takes me from 1600 to 1700.
Edit: I may be wrong but I believe it is part of what took GalaxyShield from being a 1500 level player up to an 1800 level player. As far as I remember, every game I have won against him, (+7 -3 =4) he has blundered in the opening. In particular, he plays the Keres-Parma variation against my english (e5, Nf6, c6, d5) but is afraid to push the d-pawn once he has set it up...