Fried Liver Game with Cunning Trap

Originally posted by Cimon
1) "get your pawn to the queening square" could be good point if the pawn are passed or there are any other circumstances which gives reason to think that pawn could be able to get on last horizontal.

2) "attack the b4 square" - Why this square should be attacked? If you have a good idea then please let me know.

3) "and hamper whites queenside pawns" - in - how my opinion about badness of some move may lead to conclusion about arrogance?

My point was not to argue that it was a good move. My point was to argue that it isn't useless. Then I pointed out the uses and stated that after identifying the uses it is up to the player to decide whether it is good or bad. In this case it was objectively bad but against two under 1800 players a very good subjective move since it lays a nasty little trap that you don't really expect an under 1800 to see and if he does see the trap will he find Kh1? And if does find Kh1 will he be able to hold that small advantage? Since after 19.Kh1 black has 19...Qf5 forcing the trade of queens and probably getting an easy draw.

You are a 2200+ player according to yourself. You must understand the difference between an objectively good move and a subjectively good move.

Edit: it might also be good to point out that after 19.Kh1 Qf5 20.Qxf5(forced) Nxf5 21.a4 having that pawn on a5 is pretty usefull now.

Originally posted by tomtom232
My point was not to argue that it was a good move. My point was to argue that it isn't useless. Then I pointed out the uses and stated that after identifying the uses it is up to the player to decide whether it is good or bad. In this case it was objectively bad but against two under 1800 players a very good subjective move since it lays a nasty little tra must understand the difference between an objectively good move and a subjectively good move.

With "useless" I mean objective evaluation of this move. Your arguments about possible use of that move did not convince me (as I have pointed out in one of my previous posts).

About subjective evaluation - yes, in one game between 1800 rated players this move worked, but I`m afraid that it would not work against lets say 2000 rated player. That is the reason why this move did not impress me.

edit: Compare positions between 18...a5 19.Kh1 and 18...Qf5 - after 18...Qf5 19.Qxf5 Black has additional option 19...Ne2+. So 18...a5 was waste of tempo.

Originally posted by Cimon
With "useless" I mean objective evaluation of this move. Your arguments about possible use of that move did not convince me (as I have pointed out in one of my previous posts).

About subjective evaluation - yes, in one game between 1800 rated players this move worked, but I`m afraid that it would not work against lets say 2000 rated player. That is the re ...[text shortened]... - after 18...Qf5 19.Qxf5 Black has additional option 19...Ne2+. So 18...a5 was waste of tempo.

They are not possible uses they are there. I'm not saying this move is good at all. Don't get me wrong. The point was that between to under 1800 players the conception of this move is pretty impressive. Your are right that it would not work against a 2000 player (maybe) but then it wouldn't be good subjectively.

About your edit. My point was that a5 turned out to have its use even if it was bad. That's my point all along. You called it useless which it obviously turns out that it isn't. It is bad because the loss of time makes it so and that outweighs the other uses. Imagine if you changed the position a little so that a5 had another threat(that black can also parry easily) now it doesn't waste time but has no more uses than before... By your logic then it would still be a useless move.

Originally posted by tomtom232
They are not possible uses they are there. I'm not saying this move is good at all. Don't get me wrong. The point was that between to under 1800 players the conception of this move is pretty impressive. Your are right that it would not work against a 2000 player (maybe) but then it wouldn't be good subjectively.

About your edit. My point was that a5 tu ...[text shortened]... e but has no more uses than before... By your logic then it would still be a useless move.

I don`t value moves which are not subjectively good against players who don`t miss easy tactic.

Do you want to say that your only problem was word "useless"??? 😲 If it was your only problem then I don`t mind letting you to get your own 😉

Only I would like to point out that in your interpretation "useful" can be stupid moves like 3...h6? (after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5) 😛

Originally posted by Cimon
I don`t value moves which are not subjectively good against players who don`t miss easy tactic.

Do you want to say that your only problem was word "useless"??? 😲 If it was your only problem then I don`t mind letting you to get your own 😉

Only I would like to point out that in your interpretation "useful" can be stupid moves like 3...h6? (after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5) 😛

Haha I wouldn't say useful just not useless 😀

I would like to apologize for accusing you of arrogance. I just have bad experience with 2200+ plus players being arrogant. This causes me to be judgmental sometimes.

Originally posted by tomtom232
Haha I wouldn't say useful just not useless 😀

I would like to apologize for accusing you of arrogance. I just have bad experience with 2200+ plus players being arrogant. This causes me to be judgmental sometimes.

Peace 🙂

Back to the question at hand: greenpawn - nice trap, thanks for posting. For the record, I would have fallen for it, but then, I haven't bought Rampant Chess yet (payday's Friday).

All this objective/subjective debate reminds me of a memorable quote on the Blackmar-Diemer gambit...

"...the best way to a 2000 rating, from either direction".

Originally posted by hunterknox
Back to the question at hand: greenpawn - nice trap, thanks for posting. For the record, I would have fallen for it, but then, I haven't bought Rampant Chess yet (payday's Friday).

All this objective/subjective debate reminds me of a memorable quote on the Blackmar-Diemer gambit...

"...the best way to a 2000 rating, from either direction".

Hi Hunter.

Afraid same may apply to Rampant Chess except let us use the
figure 1600. 😉


Hi Cimon

Quote:

"I don`t value moves which are not subjectively good against players
who don`t miss easy tactic."

Fair enough.

You cannot give any credit for this imaginative idea played by a
low graded player. An idea that worked giving us a sequence of play
that has brought pleasure to those have read this thread.

OK.

I just don't think that a lower graded players moves and ideas deserve
to be insulted by calling it a cheap trap.

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Hi Hunter.

Afraid same may apply to Rampant Chess except let us use the
figure 1600. 😉


Hi Cimon

Quote:

"I don`t value moves which are not subjectively good against players
who don`t miss easy tactic."

Fair enough.

You cannot give any credit for this imaginative idea played by a
low graded player. An idea that worked giving us a s ...[text shortened]... t a lower graded players moves and ideas deserve
to be insulted by calling it a cheap trap.

Greenpawn please don`t misinterpret me. I don`t care if this idea is used by lower or higher graded player. I care about quality. If quality is low then I don`t care if author is higher or lower rated player. Sometimes lower rated players can great great ideas and sometimes even GMs can play like stupid patzers.

Hi

But that is one of the joys of the game.

"Sometimes lower rated players can great great ideas and sometimes
even GMs can play like stupid patzers."

If the game was played with every move perfect then the game would die.

Accept that I may have picked you up wrong - though 'cheap trap' was
perhaps the wrong choice of words by you.

I'm the one who plays the cheap traps. 😉

Edit 1: I have a PS - I'll tag it on in another post.

Very much like having Korch back this thread.

Originally posted by Exuma
Very much like having Korch back this thread.

Funny - Cimon reminded me of the Korchster as well.

Originally posted by Squelchbelch
Funny - Cimon reminded me of the Korchster as well.

Of course it's Korch! You can't come back with a new ID and then use a word like "demagogy" and expect people not to notice!
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=demagogy+site%3Aredhotpawn.com

Originally posted by Fat Lady
Of course it's Korch! You can't come back with a new ID and then use a word like "demagogy" and expect people not to notice!
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=demagogy+site%3Aredhotpawn.com

But korch didn't get banned did he? So if this is korch then maybe he doesn't want people to know its him.... Meaning we shouldn't trumpet to the world that korch is back as cimon, and as long as he doesn't use the korch account then he isn't breaking any rules.

Originally posted by tomtom232
...and as long as he doesn't use the korch account then he isn't breaking any rules.

Yes you can create another account (providing you don't get a ban) as long as you never use your first account again.
I did ask the Admin - it had something to do with a daft username 😉