I hate opening theory!!!

I hate opening theory!!!

Only Chess

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

P

Joined
26 Jan 12
Moves
637
10 Feb 12

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
we were talking about the opening and how one might consider where the best piece
placements should be, perhaps you have a better method for evaluating the positions
which arise from the opening, well, let it be heard.
It`s better for you to read what expert says about evaluation of position. http://www.chess.com/article/view/how-to-evaluate-a-position

rc

Joined
26 Aug 07
Moves
38239
10 Feb 12
2 edits

Originally posted by Pacifique
It`s better for you to read what expert says about evaluation of position. http://www.chess.com/article/view/how-to-evaluate-a-position
sorry tell me again what it was about pawn structures and the opening to which I
alluded that was unsound, you have FAILED to say? why are you taking the diagrams
that I posted out of context? It would be better for you to use your own mind.

Not one person in this entire forum has stated why the diagrams i posted and the
placement of pieces in the opening phase based on those pawn structures is unsound!
until you can, i suggest you pony up and do so or stop taking them out of context.

P

Joined
26 Jan 12
Moves
637
10 Feb 12

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
sorry tell me again what it was about pawn structures and the opening to which I
alluded that was unsound, you have FAILED to say? what is it about pawn structures
and the placement of pieces in the opening phase that you fail to understand? why are
you taking the diagrams that I posted out of context? It would be better for you to use
your own mind.
Greenpawn already demonstrated examples of your inability to evaluate position. Bad for you if you can`t understand it.

rc

Joined
26 Aug 07
Moves
38239
10 Feb 12
1 edit

Originally posted by Pacifique
Greenpawn already demonstrated examples of your inability to evaluate position. Bad for you if you can`t understand it.
the diagrams that i initially posted were for what phase of the game? the opening, why
then are you now taking them out of context and applying them to the middle game
and actually greenpawn did nothing of the sort, the position which resulted was drawish
at best for white, if you knew how to evaluate a position, you would know that. So tell
me why are you taking my statements about the opening phase and the diagrams that i
posted out of context?

P

Joined
26 Jan 12
Moves
637
10 Feb 12

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
the diagrams that i initially posted were for what phase of the game? the opening, why
then are you now taking them out of context and applying them to the middle game
and actually greenpawn did nothing of the sort, the position which resulted was drawish
at best for white, if you knew how to evaluate a position, you would know that. So tell ...[text shortened]... ou taking my statements about the opening phase and the diagrams that i
posted out of context?
If strong players evaluate opening taking into account only pawn structure, then can you tell me why Ruy Lopez Exchange (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bc6) are played not so often as 4.Ba4 ? Pawn ending with such a pawn structure should be win for White.

rc

Joined
26 Aug 07
Moves
38239
10 Feb 12

Originally posted by Pacifique
Greenpawn already demonstrated examples of your inability to evaluate position. Bad for you if you can`t understand it.
here is your comment,

Evaluation based solely on pawn structure (without taking into account other pieces) is
nonsense. I tend to agree with Greenpawn - player of 1500-1600 should study tactics,
tactics & tactics (+ maybe also elementary strategic principles).

the opening poster was asking about the opening phase of the game, were you aware
of this? i doubt it, for if you were, you would not have uttered this silly comment, of
course there are other elements, but we were talking about the opening phase of the
game, a rather fundamental flaw to your argument, yah think!

Cornovii

North of the Tamar

Joined
02 Feb 07
Moves
53689
10 Feb 12

Originally posted by Pacifique
If strong players evaluate opening taking into account only pawn structure, then can you tell me why Ruy Lopez Exchange (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bc6) are played not so often as 4.Ba4 ? Pawn ending with such a pawn structure should be win for White.
Don't feed the troll.

rc

Joined
26 Aug 07
Moves
38239
10 Feb 12

Originally posted by Pacifique
If strong players evaluate opening taking into account only pawn structure, then can you tell me why Ruy Lopez Exchange (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bc6) are played not so often as 4.Ba4 ? Pawn ending with such a pawn structure should be win for White.
so my comments were unsound because of the Ruy Lopez exchange variation???? Is
that really the best you can do? why indeed double blacks pawns and give up the light
squared bishop, it has nothing to do with pawns, jeez! i need to feel my bum to make
sure this is not some foul nightmare.

rc

Joined
26 Aug 07
Moves
38239
10 Feb 12

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Don't feed the troll.
that comment is out of order PK, either pony up the evidence and state why the
diagrams that i posted in the opening phase and the evaluation of piece placements
based on those structures was unsound or get back to spirituality and stop talking
nonsense.

P

Joined
26 Jan 12
Moves
637
10 Feb 12

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
so my comments were unsound because of the Ruy Lopez exchange variation???? Is
that really the best you can do? why indeed double blacks pawns and give up the light
squared bishop, it has nothing to do with pawns, jeez! i need to feel my bum to make
sure this is not some foul nightmare.
"double blacks pawn" means "nothing to do with pawns"? 😀

rc

Joined
26 Aug 07
Moves
38239
10 Feb 12
1 edit

Originally posted by Pacifique
"double blacks pawn" means "nothing to do with pawns"? 😀
this diagram is therefore meaningless? and will not influence whites strategic decisions
in any way?

P

Joined
26 Jan 12
Moves
637
10 Feb 12

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
this diagram is therefore meaningless? and will not influence whites strategic decisions
in any way?

[fen]6k1/1pp2ppp/p1p5/4p3/4P3/8/PPPP1PPP/6K1 b - - 0 5[/fen]
For your notice - in Ruy Lopez exchange Black can`t avoid exchange of White d-pawn after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.d4. How your "only pawns" evaluation works after 5...exd4 6.Qxd4 ?

rc

Joined
26 Aug 07
Moves
38239
10 Feb 12
6 edits

Originally posted by Pacifique
For your notice - in Ruy Lopez exchange Black can`t avoid exchange of White d-pawn after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.d4. How your "only pawns" evaluation works after 5...exd4 6.Qxd4 ?
you dont say, black cannot avoid double pawns, what a revelation! d4 i would not play
d4??, i would play as Capa did with d3, d4 opens the position up and black has two
bishops, why should i open the position up for blacks two bishops?



excellent doubled pawns! and a half open f file, you were saying ?

Joined
21 Feb 07
Moves
58407
10 Feb 12

If you hate opening theory as black you can play queen''s gambit declined (d4, e6, Nf6, Be7, 0-0) against everything but 1. e4 against which you can play the scandinavian defence, as white you can start with 1. e4 and then play the center game against ...e5, french exchange against ...e6, caro kann exchange against ...c6 and against sicilian just play center game again with 1. e4 c5 2. d4 cxd4 3. Qxd4 Nc6 4. Qe3.

Cornovii

North of the Tamar

Joined
02 Feb 07
Moves
53689
10 Feb 12

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
that comment is out of order PK, either pony up the evidence and state why the
diagrams that i posted in the opening phase and the evaluation of piece placements
based on those structures was unsound or get back to spirituality and stop talking
nonsense.
Beetle and Greenpawn or Robbie Carrobie? I know where i'm putting my money.