31 Jan 09
Originally posted by JakalAfter 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 any modern opening book will suggest you to play 4...dxc6.
In the Ruy Lopez, if on move 4 the white Bishop takes Knight on c6, should black take back with the b7 or d7 pawn. The books say to capture toward the middle, but engines suggest to take with the d7 pawn (i.e., the Queen's pawn). What is better and why?
31 Jan 09
Originally posted by JakalWhy not play 3...f5 & avoid a whole stack of theory?
In the Ruy Lopez, if on move 4 the white Bishop takes Knight on c6, should black take back with the b7 or d7 pawn. The books say to capture toward the middle, but engines suggest to take with the d7 pawn (i.e., the Queen's pawn). What is better and why?
31 Jan 09
Originally posted by TyrannosauruschexThe "pawn down" effect? I don't understand.
It is not completely unplayable to play bxc6 but why not allow your light square bishop a quicker route to activity with dxc6 - it plays almost like a gambit type position for black, except he will only feel the 'pawn down' effect if the game reaches an endgame.
31 Jan 09
Originally posted by SquelchbelchThat would result in a generation of ignorant nihilists walking about in a zombie state unable to contribute to meaningful discussions on chess. I thought the OTB club taught its people to do their talking OTB?
Why not play 3...f5 & avoid a whole stack of theory?
31 Jan 09
Originally posted by Jakalhere is a very interesting game in which black plays fianchetto variation of 3...g6 and manages to put the former world champion Anatoly Karpov under some pressure. Not only that, but black has doubled c pawns from early on, but as greenpawn states in his recent book, Rampant chess, for every doubled c pawn, there is a half open file waiting for some Rook fun!
In the Ruy Lopez, if on move 4 the white Bishop takes Knight on c6, should black take back with the b7 or d7 pawn. The books say to capture toward the middle, but engines suggest to take with the d7 pawn (i.e., the Queen's pawn). What is better and why?
the game is between former world champion Anatoly Karpov and international master Mark Condie, played in a simultaneous exhibition, Glasgow, 1984
I provide the details to demonstrate that this opening variation variation is playable, certainly at my measly level and that doubled pawns , even against the best positional player in the world, are not necessarily a bad thing.
01 Feb 09
Originally posted by Mad RookWell if you played the resulting position as a pawn endgame then black would be unable to break through on the queenside because of his doubled c pawns. This means that although the material is level, white gains an effective extra pawn on the kingside with which he can orchastrate a pawn breakthrough, force the black king back and then transfer to the queenside where he gobbles up all the remaining pawns and wins.
The "pawn down" effect? I don't understand.
01 Feb 09
Originally posted by TyrannosauruschexAh, OK, thanks for the clarification.
Well if you played the resulting position as a pawn endgame then black would be unable to break through on the queenside because of his doubled c pawns. This means that although the material is level, white gains an effective extra pawn on the kingside with which he can orchastrate a pawn breakthrough, force the black king back and then transfer to the queenside where he gobbles up all the remaining pawns and wins.
01 Feb 09
4 edits
Originally posted by JieOnly ignorant patzer like you will accuse in ignorance someone who recommends Schliemann (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5), which is sometimes used even in top GM level. Or maybe you are going to claim that Carlsen and Radjabov are ignorant?
Are you in the OTB Club or they kicked you out? You want to tell me someone who plays OTB for real can afford to be ignorant of the Ruy? No wonder Fat Lady was complaining of beating 1200 players in FICS .
Btw. Whats your OTB rating?
P.S. And feel free to explain why are you such a coward and afraid to be beaten in blitz by me?