Go back
Fun openings against the Queen's Gambit

Fun openings against the Queen's Gambit

Only Chess

3 edits
Vote Up
Vote Down

  • 8
  • a
  • 7
  • b
  • 6
  • c
  • 5
  • d
  • 4
  • e
  • 3
  • f
  • 2
  • g
  • 1
  • h
1.d4d5
2.c4e5
3.dxe5d4
4.e3Bf8b4
5.Bc1d2dxe3
6.Bd2xb4exf2
7.Ke1e2fxg1=N
8.Ke2e1Qd8h4
9.Ke1d2Nb8c6
10.Bb4c3Qh4f4
11.Kd2e1Qf4e4
12.Ke1d2Bc8g4
13.Qd1e1O-O-O
14.Kd2c1Qe4xe1
15.Bc3xe1Rd8d1
16.Kc1c2Rd1xe1
17.Rh1xg1Bg4e2
18.e6fxe6
19.Bf1xe2Re1xg1

0

      1 edit
      Vote Up
      Vote Down

      yes mate thankyou for putting that up lesson learned i actually believe that is the first time ive played that opening and no word of a lie i was reading the opening literally minutes before the game started ie chris ward opening play .. so congratulations on the win lets play some more regards ian

      Vote Up
      Vote Down

      It is good to delete the names of people you play when you post your games. We all have our good games and bad games. I know I wouldn't like people posting my bad game with my name attached to it.

      Although if Greenpawn wants, he can pull out my bad games and try to drill a point. Maybe I'll get better. ๐Ÿ˜€

      2 edits
      Vote Up
      Vote Down

      Why retreat the king? Why capture the knight with the rook? Never mind, I see it, the x-ray on the king by the white bishop.

      e3 was the bad move, but hey I don't think he'll do it again. Develop pieces not pawns. ๐Ÿ˜€

      2 edits
      Vote Up
      Vote Down

      Vote Up
      Vote Down

      yes lesson learned im usually playing better must have been an off day oh well im glad its happened seen the light ....

      1 edit
      Vote Up
      Vote Down

      Hi Eladar.

      Games without names would be awful. It's all part of the fun.
      Also who cares, most here have a nic. Nobody knows who you are.

      Think of the games history? In the olden days the BCM never used to
      publish the names of the losers so you got Mr Staunton v Mr B_________
      And years later when they are compiling databases you get all these
      games being left out or credited to Unknown or Anon.

      The games history is important, we look at these games to see and learn from
      the blunders of our ancestors.

      If friend rookorbycrook had known his history then perhaps he would not have
      fallen for a trap over 100 years old.

      The Trap even has it's own name 'The Lasker Trap' and it has caught
      61 players....sorrry rookorbycrook....62 players on here and has featured in
      many an RHP thread.

      (BTW Tygert good notes - excellent notes, but the black pawn on d4 is not an outpost.
      It's a pawn on d4. An outpost is a vacant central square usually in your
      opponents half of the board which is protected by a pawn and cannot be
      attacked by an enemy pawns. By central I mean the rectangle b3 - g6.

      By chance in the thread I posted 'Annoying Win', posted before I read this
      you will see I mention the outpost on e3 not calling it an outpost till it was
      protected by a pawn.
      Just thought I'd clear that up before someone else did.)

      So names are in.

      Eladar - AttilaTheHorn (and in bold) RHP 2009

      I will stay with the under promotion theme - and start a new theme.
      Players resigning in a clearly won position.

      'Hope Chess'

      • 8
      • a
      • 7
      • b
      • 6
      • c
      • 5
      • d
      • 4
      • e
      • 3
      • f
      • 2
      • g
      • 1
      • h
      1.b3d5
      2.Bb2Bg4
      3.f3Bf5
      4.e4dxe4
      5.Qe2exf3
      6.Qb5Qd7
      7.Qxb7Qe6
      8.Kf2Be4
      9.Bb5Kd8
      10.Bc4fxg2
      11.Bxe6gxh1=N
      12.Ke3Bxb7

      0

          Vote Up
          Vote Down

          That was my attempt at the Litus gambit. I don't really like it much. ๐Ÿ˜€

          Look it up, I'd think you'd like the kind of games it makes!

          Vote Up
          Vote Down

          Originally posted by Eladar
          That was my attempt at the Litus gambit. I don't really like it much. ๐Ÿ˜€

          Look it up, I'd think you'd like the kind of games it makes!
          The annotations are never meant to humiliate anyone by posting their bad games or to gain recognition for playing a good one. They are intended as a bit of fun and as a benefit to everyone.

          BTW rookorbycrook I can't challenge you, you're at your game limit.
          I'll add you as a buddy then we can play again. Give me a bit ofr thrashing this time wit something exotic and we can post it!

          Vote Up
          Vote Down

          Hi Ty.

          "The annotations are never meant to humiliate anyone by posting their bad games.."

          Of course not. In 99% of the cases it should help the lad.
          Fearless notes is what's best, not the notes you often see in magazines
          of vuds where the annotator adds excuses to a GM's blunder.

          "...he had lost his luggage at the airport....he was tired....he did not like the cold/heat..
          ...there was a fly in the room...bad form...he did not have the latest Fritz...
          ...he never left his chess engine running long enough (this is a new one that
          I've seen twice now.)...time trouble (TT is a reason for the blunder, never an excuse.)

          On here when I'm feeling charitable I will remind the reader the player
          is usually a home and casual player often playing ยฝ a dozen games at the same time.

          And as I said before, who are they? a nickname often with no profile.

          Vote Up
          Vote Down

          Originally posted by greenpawn34
          Hi Ty.

          "The annotations are never meant to humiliate anyone by posting their bad games.."

          Of course not. In 99% of the cases it should help the lad.
          Fearless notes is what's best, not the notes you often see in magazines
          of vuds where the annotator adds excuses to a GM's blunder.

          "...he had lost his luggage at the airport....he was tired....he ...[text shortened]... t the same time.

          And as I said before, who are they? a nickname often with no profile.
          Greenpawn would it be possible for us to play a serious game?

          Vote Up
          Vote Down

          Originally posted by Tygert
          Greenpawn would it be possible for us to play a serious game?
          Last time I heard, GP was only playing triple digit rated players, trying to get a great rating that way. ๐Ÿ˜€

          In all fairness, if GP played everyone that wanted to play him, he wouldn't have time for his blog lol.

          Vote Up
          Vote Down

          Originally posted by Eladar
          Last time I heard, GP was only playing triple digit rated players, trying to get a great rating that way. ๐Ÿ˜€

          In all fairness, if GP played everyone that wanted to play him, he wouldn't have time for his blog lol.
          1. Greenpawn is worthy of his rating. I am actually surprised that it is not higher considering the quality of his games.
          2. He would not get any points from beating 900 rated players anyway.

          Difference ____ H -- D -- L
          0-10 __________ 16 - 0 - 16
          11-32 _________ 15 - 1 - 17
          33-54 _________ 14 - 2 - 18
          55-77 _________ 13 - 3 - 19
          78-100 ________ 12 - 4 - 20
          101-124 _______ 11 - 5 - 21
          125-149 _______ 10 - 6 - 22
          150-176 _______ 9 - 7 - 23
          177-205 _______ 8 - 8 - 24
          206-237 _______ 7 - 9 - 25
          238-273 _______ 6 - 10 - 26
          274-314 _______ 5 - 11 - 27
          315-364 _______ 4 - 12 - 28
          365-428 _______ 3 - 13 - 29
          429-523 _______ 2 - 14 - 30
          524-719 _______ 1 - 15 - 31
          720+ __________ 0 - 16 - 32

          Key

          H - Higher rated player wins that number of points.
          D - Draw, higher player losses that number, lower players gains that number.
          L - Lower rated player wins that number of points.

          Vote Up
          Vote Down

          I didn't say that he was doing it to simply get a higher rating, he was doing at for kicks.

          1 edit
          Vote Up
          Vote Down

          Originally posted by Eladar
          I didn't say that he was doing it to simply get a higher rating, he was doing at for kicks.
          No I don't think so it would like you beating a two year old and congratulating yourself at the end of it. It would be a complete walkover. Where's the fun in that? The fun is in the fight.

          Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.