black



FICGS - Search results for black





There are 568 results for black in the forum.


Scott Ligon    (2025-01-07 18:55:30)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?

I am running an experiment where each move will be selected by Stockfish 17 in a deterministic configuration, so it will be possible to predict my response to any given move with certainty. I believe Stockfish 17 at these settings is so strong that it will be difficult if not impossible to exploit this strategy. However, if I reach a position where it looks like this strategy is going to lose, I reserve the right to deviate. If this happens, I will message my opponent to let them know that I am no longer following this system.

I'm using a python script to interact with Stockfish, but you should be able to get the same results running Stockfish 17 from the command line. I am currently running the search with the parameter nodes = 10 million (previously I tried nodes = 5 million but I found a way for white to win against Stockfish at that setting). From the command line:

go nodes 10000000

In order for Stockfish to be deterministic, it needs to be running on just 1 thread and from the command line that's the default. If for some reason Threads has a different value on your machine:

setoption name Threads value 1

I'm using the default size for the hash table, but if you run the search a second time without clearing the hash, you will get a different search result. So either close and restart Stockfish between searches or else clear the hash table:

setoption name Clear Hash

Lastly you need to be able to input the position before running the search. It is important that you enter the position via FEN string rather than by inputting the moves, because you might get different search results otherwise. Use only the first four fields of the FEN string, like this to get black's response after 1 e4:

position fen rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/4P3/8/PPPP1PPP/RNBQKBNR b KQkq -

From that position if you run Stockfish with nodes = 10 million, the last two lines of text output should say:

info depth 32 seldepth 46 multipv 1 score cp -26 lowerbound nodes 10000376 nps 462252 hashfull 999 tbhits 0 time 21634 pv c7c5
bestmove c7c5 ponder g1f3

I think only the values of "nps" and "time" will vary, everything else should be identical between runs / machines. So in this case Stockfish 17 recommends the Sicilian Defense and gives an evaluation of +0.26. (cp -26 is the evaluation in centipawns from the perspective of the side to move, but usually evals are given from white's POV).


Per Lea    (2006-04-10 09:52:36)
Games appearing in short list

Thanx for obeying my wish - now the "My games" list is much easier to read. But why can't I just click on one of the games in this list when I want to make a move? If you prefer, you could put a symbol (such as the white or black rook) next to the games where it is my move, to make it easier to see where it is my move. Then there is really no need to list the games (where it is my move) under "My messages" as well.


Walter Rattay    (2006-04-14 22:01:49)
Last moves and coordinates on board

When opening our games, the game boards do not show the last moves. We have to scroll down to learn our opponent's move, then scroll back to view the board. Also, because there are no coordinates on the board, we are more likely to make a mistake, especially when playing black.


Per Lea    (2006-05-17 13:39:50)
Criteria for Best game

Can someone please tell me why 11 votes have been cast for game 156 as Best game? The way I see it, Black blunders on move 9 to lose the exchange, and finishes off with a howler on move 17. Or have I missed something here?


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-05-24 14:46:20)
New features

Here are some new features :

- Countries directory - http://www.ficgs.com/directory_countries.html
(with players sorted by name)
- Players sorted by rating for each country (click on the flags on the rating list)
- More player statistics (results with white and black, elo average opponents)


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-06-01 13:22:24)
Infinite repetition

Couldn't the problem of infinite repetition be solved by giving the full point to White (the 2nd player, not like chess) ? It could be a compensation added to komi, as it can force black to give such stones that provoke repetition !?

But can White force easily such a situation with many stones....... ?


Lionel Vidal    (2006-06-01 15:02:56)
Infinite repetition

Well, it might work, but that seems unfair to black IMO, because it creates discrepancies in the rules depending on you being sente or gote.
Admitedly, the komi can be seen as such discrepancy, but all it does is forcing sente to be bit more aggresive, the stategy and tactics, the feeling of the game being globally the same. What you propose would induce a kind of strategic play on the rules... not really Go anymore!
I realise I may not be clear: as an extreme example of rules discrepanies, just consider Renju. Here the rules are different for sente and gote and the strategy is indeed really different for both! While this is fine in Renju, because actually it became the heart of the game, I do not think Go needs it.
Besides, it would spoil somehow IMO the aesthetic feeling of the game flow.
Just my opinions of course :-)


Lionel Vidal    (2006-06-02 16:28:11)
Go rules

It's me again :-)

What is the point of the special cases you chose? Why not simply follow the chinese rule? I reread it yesterday and compared to what you say:
- reappearance of the same board position is forbidden (note that should be easy to check by computer with hash keys associated to positions)
- Seki is not really a special case in chinese rule (it is only in territory scoring): you count stones and enclosed vacant points; others vacant points are share equally.
- Winner is determined by comparing one's score to 180 1/2 (half number of points of the board). - Komi: 2 3/4 points are deducted from black's score and added to white's. - After both sides have agreed to end the game (that is after a double pass), if any unsettled positions remain on the board, both sides' stones are treated as alive (that is neat and solve most drawing problems) - Basically a player that makes an illegal move loses his turn (i.e. in effect passes): that includes repeating the same position (why should white win in such a case?).

That sounds much cleaner IMO.
The only possible draw may be some very complex round robin kos, where the position keeps changing, but I guess we can forget it (and it should eventually been resoved by double pass anyway, even if one side is unhappy: see the preceding neat point).
BTW you can probably find the full text on the Web (I have only a paper version from the 1988 official rules of Chinese Weiqi Association).


Kuzma Pecotic    (2006-06-03 07:28:29)
Incorrect move

This is my game:

[Event "FICGS__CHESS__CLASS_A__000003"]
[Site "FICGS"]
[Date "2006.04.22"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Pecotic,Kuzma"]
[Black "Sobrecases,Guy"]
[Result "*"]
[WhiteElo "2179"]
[BlackElo "2105"]

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 Nc6 6.Nxc6 bxc6 7.e5 Nd5 8.Ne4 Qc7 9.f4 Qa5+ 10.Bd2 Qb6 11.Bd3 Qxb2 12.O-O Qd4+ 13.Kh1 Ba6 14.Bxa6 Qxe4 15.Rb1 Qa4 16.Bd3 f5 17.*


For what reason: Incorrect move : 17.exf6


Amir Bagheri    (2006-06-19 14:53:39)
1. d4

The move 1.d4 offers the same benefits to development and center control as does 1.e4, but unlike with the King Pawn openings where the e4 pawn is undefended after the first move, the d4 pawn is protected by White's queen. This slight difference has a tremendous effect on the opening. For instance, whereas the King's Gambit is rarely played today at the highest levels of chess, the Queen's Gambit remains a popular weapon at all levels of play. Also, compared with the King Pawn openings, transpositions between variations are more common and critical in the closed games. White develops aiming for a particular formation without great concern over how Black chooses to defend. Both these systems are popular with club players because they are easy to learn, but are rarely used by professionals because a well prepared opponent playing Black can equalize fairly easily.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-06-19 15:13:45)
Chess Openings

Hi Tim.

What do you mean with Ruy Lopez ? There's IMO no opening better than other, it first depends on you play Black or White, who is your opponent (strength, favourite openings...), time controls..

Maybe you should specify your question... What opening against what move etc...

PS : I hope Amir will take a look at Wikichess, his opinion on chess openings would be very interesting to know ;)


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-06-20 16:05:08)
Sicilian opening & Kasparov

I quote from Amir analysis : "But if you want to win, the Sicilian is really the best choice."

I fully agree, I'll just add: but Sveshnikov sicilian :)

Actually, (not a surprise) you just have to see how Black pieces are conducted by Garry Kasparov in sicilian opening to understand what lines to follow, why it is the best choice... and why he became the best player of all times.

He simply always wanted to win, never draw... It is an illustration of a quote in this interesting (but failed) movie by Guy Ritchie, "Revolver" : "To win against a weaker opponent, you have to extend the game field."

Finally, it's the exact opposite of what Bobby Fischer said : "I don't believe in psychology, I believe in good moves". That's not enough IMO, chess openings are a psychologic battle that reflect the state of mind and will. It often decides in a way the result of the game, not by moves, but by the intention.


Wayne Lowrance    (2006-06-22 21:11:43)
interesting question for the Gambit's a

Sir let me explain, the stats are taken from A database of 1600 GM's. the statistic is taken prior to blacks response but assuming pxp. Of course the percentages varies as you go thru the book lines. Where did your statistics come from (e-mail me, dont want to continue with troll)? Kings gambit with perfect play as you say leads to a draw. That does not impress me much. I agree the best defence against a gambit is accept, I usually do. Yes your right the thread is a troll, I apoligize for contributing but I found my self not being able to agree with where the last few topics were heading. I do not accept this mind games thing excet against a very weak player playing a much stronger player. In this case I agree. I end the troll with this...Wayne


Paul-Iosif Guralivu    (2006-06-30 10:50:31)
Forfeit problem

Game 934 (chess)

White clock - 30 days 23:29:09
Black clock - Out of time.

[Event "FICGS__CHESS__RAPID_C__000002"]
[Site "FICGS"]
[Date "2006.05.31"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Guralivu,Paul-Iosif"]
[Black "Alessandrini,Alfredo"]
[Result "*"]
[WhiteElo "1293"]
[BlackElo "1400"]

1.e4 *

Should this game be forfeit ? Should all the games of Mr. Alessandrini be forfeit ?


Gino Figlio    (2006-07-04 01:07:56)
Symmetrical games

The format used(8-game match with simultaneous games, 4 white and 4 black) brings up the issue of avoiding symmetrical games. I don't see a perfect way of doing this other than being conscious of the problem, and trying to deviate early on. If I see an opening chosen by my opponent that I am also planning to use, I have waited to respond in one(or more) of the games, until the position reached a point where I would normal deviate, and choose an alternate move with the opposite colour. Anyone else with better ideas about how to avoid this problem?


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-07-04 01:52:31)
Symmetrical games

Hello Gino.

What do you mean "symmetrical games" exactly ? (time is an important element)

First case, a player copies move after move another game played at the same time (a move after). Cheating is obvious and it's forbidden (rules)...

Second case, a game is symmetrical but moves are not played "at the same time" : It means suicide in the match for the player who has to win, with either Black or White... The same about the games played by the same player as White, there's no interest to play the same openings, as it would save his opponent's energy and loose chances to provoke a fault.

I had seen you were waiting to move with black in your match, but you can play the same opening with Black, it's up to your opponent to play different openings, otherwise it's good for you...


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-07-04 16:55:10)
Symmetrical games

I don't understand how it could be a problem. If one consider a critical position at the end of the opening (ie. clear advantage for White), who plays White first knows the position is bad for Black... Why would he play the same opening with Black ? It's a wrong question IMO, there are very few cases where there's only a "good" move until the end of the game.

Anyway, this question is even more relevant when playing different tournaments in different organizations (a player may respond moves played by an opponent in a game at IECG in another game at ICCF....) than in two players matches. Nothing can prevent that, but what a shame and where's the satisfaction ? I think it's not a problem there.


Gino Figlio    (2006-07-04 17:55:59)
Symmetrical games

Chess is not a draw yet, someone wins in 70% of the cases(40% white, 30% black), the farther you go identical in two games, the more likely the player on move will find the critical position where only one player wins, even if one is weaker than the other. Players of similar strength or chess knowledge will realize this during the game, once the puzzle of a position becomes more clear, after every move.


John Knudsen    (2006-07-04 18:50:05)
Symmetrical games

Hi Thibault: The format is unusual, and not desired, IMHO, because you do not need an 8-game match with one opponent to determine who is the superior player. Think about it - it is 4 games with white, and 4 games with black. Overkill. You mention OTB chess players. What OTB player has played an 8-game match with the same opponent, lately? Never happens. It also never happens in serious correspondence chess, except here. I do not want to complain too much, because I thank you for the neat server, and the opportunity to play some serious games for free. However, the format will need to change, in the future, if you want to attract excellent players. John


Rodrigo Jaroszewski    (2006-07-11 22:14:16)
A question

Thibault wrote concerning rapid clock: "* 14 days + 1 day/move (rapid) : As players don't know exactly when tournaments will start, I think 30 days at start (ie. compared : email tournaments often start before the real date) is a good choice to avoid accidental forfeits during holidays !" Since your concern is with the first moves, how about using the 14 days + 1 move/day suggestion, but on the first two plies (e.g.: 1.e4 c5) you add a second clock that would give a period of 10 days for White and Black (separately) to know the game is on, before they make their first moves? It'd go like this: White has 10 days on this "grace period" + 14 days. Two possibilities: 1) He makes his first move. The time he had remaining on his "grace period" is removed, and he would have the 14 days. He would not get an additional day for it. 2) He does not make the move on the "grace period" and his 14 days clock starts running down. When he does move, one day will be added, as it normally would. When White moves (if White ever moves), then: 3) Black makes his first move. The remaining of his "grace period" is removed, his 14 days remain, no days are added. Or, 4) Black does not make a move in the "grace period", his 14 days clock begins to run. If he makes a move, he'll gain the day, as he normally would. In both cases, no more "grace periods" would be added for the rest of the game, and White's clock would start running with 14 days or less, depending if (1) or (2) happened. I'm not sure if I was clear, neither if it is actually possible to do so. It's just a suggestion. I also hope that the forum does not clutter my message. :)


Dirk Jan Van Dijl    (2006-07-23 20:53:50)
Error 2?

Hello there! After 1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bc4 e6 7 0-0 the program allows castling by Black, but the black Bishop is still at f8. All the best! Dick van Dijl


Marc Lacrosse    (2006-08-22 12:04:09)
Thematic Blackmar

Hi Thibault

I think you should go one move further for the Blackmar thematic tourney (2..dxe4).
In the present definition you will get loads of French and Caro-Kann defences through 2..e6 or 2..c6 !

:-)))

Marc


Dinesh De Silva    (2006-08-22 12:32:21)
Re: Thematic Blackmar......

Hey, Marc & Thibault! Look at this: 1. d4 d5 2. e4 dxe4 3. Nc3 c6 4. Nxe4 Bf5/Nd7/Nf6 (It's still a Caro-Kahn!). OR 1. d4 d5 2. e4 dxe4 3. Nc3 e6 4. Nxe4 Nf6/Nd7 (It's still a French Defence!). Haha!


Pablo Schmid    (2006-08-22 14:33:13)
Re

Maybe he should have put the starting position of the true BDG via : 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3, but there are differents move orders, and Black are not forced to play 3.Nf6 in that move order. But if 3..e6 or 3..c6, it could transpose into a French or Caro, but White could still play in a BDG style : 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 c6 4.Bc4!? followed by a f3, or 4.f3!?; and 3..e6 4.f3!? (Nxe4 is already a well-known position of the French).


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-08-22 14:36:59)
Re: Thematic Blackmar......

Hi Marc & Dinesh... You're right. Anyway it's too late, already 5 (!) players in the waiting list. So we'll see...


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-08-22 16:48:47)
Thematic Blackmar : 1 day !

Obviously, you were interested in playing Blackmar thematic tournament. The waiting list has been completed in only 1 day :)

I'll try to find more openings like this one...


Benjamin Aldag    (2006-08-22 17:56:16)
SORRY

Second move of black must be Nc6 !!!!

2...Nc6

BENNY

(moderator : corrected)


Benjamin Aldag    (2006-08-22 20:12:07)
Disproved

Ok,

i got my knowledge by GM Roman Dzindzihasvili's Video-Tapes, some studys and a lot of played games of Kings Gambit. Latvian isn't good too. I think, with a good computer and a good knowledge about kings gambit, the minimum what black can reach is a draw. If white play latvian, black will win ever. Latvian Gambit is so easy to calculate with a computer. Black has from the beginning on, no move-options.

But we can try both desasters in a thematic-tourney.

Benny


Benjamin Aldag    (2006-08-22 20:15:34)
^^^^^^^^Once again...

Black play the Latvian. And whit will win ever in each variation. Thats my opinion. Benny


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-08-24 18:47:42)
Latvian gambit

Waiting for your move in the Latvian gambit line, Benjamin ;)

Your line is very interesting... It's not easy for black after a long forced sequence, but it's still playable over the board in my opinion...


Benjamin Aldag    (2006-08-24 20:01:31)
we will see....

Sorry for my slow commentating-speed, but i have over 60 corr-games here at the same time and must analyse. Tonight (german-time) i will commentate the rest of your moves. Maybe i think wrong, but i still do not believe in the Latvian-Gambit. There is no good line for black in this Gambit. Just a few traps. Chess is not a game of hoping for a stupid opponent. Chess is a game of good moves by black and white and i would never play a line, by hoping for a bad move of my opponent. Maybe in Blitz or Bullet.....but never in Corr-Games.


Benjamin Aldag    (2006-08-24 20:19:09)
Why do you play corr-chess ?

Hi again,

i play corr-games, because i want to learn more about my repertoire-openings. If you look at my games, you will see every time the same gamestyle and often the same opening. I love the Grand Prix Attack and the closed Sicilian with the white colors. With black i prefer to play Dzindzi-Indian, also known as The Beefeater. Corr-Chess is for me one of the best ways, to try some learned lines and look for better a better continue.

Now my question: Why do you play corr-chess ?

Benny


Benjamin Aldag    (2006-08-26 01:37:37)
"NEW" Opening Idea !

Hello,

i would be very happy, to see the following line in a thematic opening tourney:

1.e4 e5
2.Nf3 Nc6
3.Bc4 Bc5
4.c3 Nf6
5.d4 exd4
6.cxd4 Bb4+
7.Nc3 Nxe4
8.0-0 0-0!

ok folks, i am searching for this line in my database and found just a handfull games, played by low rated players. I am searching in many books for this line, but i found nothing ! I've analysed this line and i believe, this line is good for BLACK ! What do you think about this line ??? Do you see more than me ? Do you have any GM-Commentary about this line ? Maybe in an ebook or something else ? Please help me to find the answer, why this line is never played by some very good players. It would be helpful, to start a thematic-tourney'bout this nice line.

Benny


Don Burden    (2006-08-26 18:51:54)
Opening Idea

I'd say it is a fairly big advantage to black. He's a solid pawn up and threatens to win another. Found two games in my database with higher rated players:

[Event "ICCF MN/12 corr"]
[Site "ICCF corr"]
[Date "1995.06.30"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Majewski, Jan"]
[Black "Chorvat, Marian"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C54"]
[WhiteElo "2335"]
[BlackElo "2305"]
[PlyCount "122"]
[EventDate "1995.??.??"]
[Source "www.chesslib.no"]
[SourceDate "2006.04.01"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. c3 Nf6 5. d4 exd4 6. cxd4 Bb4+ 7. Nc3 Nxe4 8. O-O O-O 9. d5 Bxc3 10. bxc3 Ne7 11. Re1 Nf6 12. d6 Nf5 13. Ba3 Nxd6 14. Bxd6 cxd6 15. Qxd6 Ne8 16. Qd5 Nf6 17. Qd6 Ne8 18. Qd2 d6 19. Ng5 Nf6 20. Rad1 d5 21. Bb3 h6 22. Ne4 Bg4 23. Nxf6+ Qxf6 24. f3 Qb6+ 25. Qd4 Be6 26. Bxd5 Bxd5 27. Qxb6 axb6 28. Rxd5 Rxa2 29. f4 Rc8 30. Rd3 Rc2 31. Ree3 Ra8 32. h4 Raa2 33. Rg3 Rd2 34. Rde3 Kf8 35. Re4 b5 36. Re5 Rab2 37. Rc5 b4 38. Rc8+ Ke7 39. cxb4 Rxb4 40. Rxg7 Rxf4 41. Rh7 Rf6 42. Kh2 Ke6 43. h5 Rd5 44. g4 Rd4 45. Kg3 Rd3+ 46. Kg2 Rd6 47. Re8+ Kd7 48. Rf8 Ke7 49. Rhh8 Ke6 50. Re8+ Kd5 51. Re7 b6 52. Rf8 Rf4 53. Kg3 Rdf6 54. Rc8 Rf3+ 55. Kg2 Rf2+ 56. Kg1 R2f4 57. Rg8 b5 58. Re3 b4 59. Kg2 Kd4 60. Rb3 Rb6 61. Kg3 Rf1 0-1

[Event "ICCF MN/12 corr"]
[Site "ICCF corr"]
[Date "1995.06.30"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Mathias, Manfred"]
[Black "Chorvat, Marian"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C54"]
[WhiteElo "2370"]
[BlackElo "2305"]
[PlyCount "110"]
[EventDate "1995.??.??"]
[Source "www.chesslib.no"]
[SourceDate "2006.04.01"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. c3 Nf6 5. d4 exd4 6. cxd4 Bb4+ 7. Nc3 Nxe4 8. O-O O-O 9. d5 Bxc3 10. bxc3 Ne7 11. Re1 Nf6 12. d6 Nf5 13. dxc7 Qxc7 14. Qb3 d5 15. Bd3 Be6 16. Rb1 b6 17. Qc2 g6 18. Bb2 Ne8 19. Re2 Neg7 20. Rbe1 Rfe8 21. Qd2 Nd6 22. c4 dxc4 23. Qc3 f6 24. Bxg6 hxg6 25. Qxf6 Qf7 26. Rxe6 Qxf6 27. Rxf6 Rxe1+ 28. Nxe1 Re8 29. Nf3 Re2 30. Be5 Nf7 31. Bd4 Re6 32. Kf1 Rxf6 33. Bxf6 b5 34. Bc3 Ne6 35. h4 Nf4 36. a3 Nd5 37. Bb4 a6 38. g3 Kg7 39. Ke2 Kf6 40. Ba5 Nd6 41. g4 Nb7 42. Bd2 a5 43. Bg5+ Kg7 44. Ne5 c3 45. Kd3 b4 46. Kc4 Nb6+ 47. Kd4 Nc5 48. axb4 axb4 49. f3 Nd5 50. Nc4 Ne6+ 51. Kd3 Nxg5 52. hxg5 b3 53. Na3 Kf7 54. f4 c2 55. Nxc2 Nxf4+ 0-1



Elmer Valderrama    (2006-08-27 11:17:48)
opening idea

..aparently everyone was/is impressed by the game Spielmann-Cohn, Carslbad 1907... --> White get such a big advantage in development that it's hard to think Black will get away with anything best than a draw here..


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-10 14:31:47)
Sudden death games !

Hello to all.

Does someone have any idea about chess openings that would give White 50% chances to win & Black 50% chances to win OR draw, or reverse ? (in absolute, not ie. blitz statistics)

Thinking about 1.e4 Nf6 2.d4 Ng8 or 1.Nf3 d5 2.Ng1, in examples... but it's hard to know. Databases can't help much as very few games with obvious errors have been played. So mad gambits could be real challenges to play & analyze, with no draws at the outcome...

Your feelings ?


Gino Figlio    (2006-09-11 13:45:43)
OTB idea

Why not for a 1-game match, use the OTB tie-breaking idea of black winning with the draw but starting with less time on the clock, 20% less in a fast time control match?


Ulrich Imbeck    (2006-09-11 14:15:48)
Gambits

Dear Thibault, your examples were strange. Let's have a look to employments of normal freaks like Bücker. Let's have a look to Gambit variations in the Blackmar-Diemer like 5.Dxf3 or in the Kings Gambit.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-11 14:40:57)
Chance & casino games

Hi Dinesh.

Problem is FICGS shouldn't become a casino.. (with stud poker, blackjack, roulette or whatever chancy game like this :)) It's legally difficult already to organize tournaments with prizes for "mental sports"... Adding confusion may create some problems.


Ulrich Imbeck    (2006-09-12 01:07:36)
White to win

What's the matter with 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Lb7 3.Ld3 f5? I think it's won for white. You should look for a position hat would give White 50% chances to win & Black 50% chances draw. Only well known openings can give an experience for a score.


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-12 03:42:57)
Match FICGS vs. GameKnot

Dear chessfriends, a match FICGS vs. GameKnot may start in a few weeks ! The idea is to oppose players in different rating categories (1200 to 2400+ elo), playing one game with Black on FICGS, one game with White on GameKnot.com ... Please send an email to info (at) ficgs.com (specifying your name) if you're interested. More info in a few days & weeks...

It seems that many players from GameKnot want to play this match, we need a large team ! :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-15 17:09:17)
Scoring function for Go

The scoring function for Go is now online !

When you are to play your move, there's a (Score) link under the Goban, that leads to the score page. Just enter a stone coordinates (ie. f14) for each group to remove, separated by space or coma, then Submit.

The score is calculated by covering the board horizontally, then vertically... If the two results are near from each other, the estimation may be quite good. Empty points between black stones and white stones are shared !


Here is an example - http://www.ficgs.com/game_814.html

Game 814, removed groups : m19 l16 f13 d11 f7 g4 k4 b5


Scoring method : Horizontally
Black points : 240 White points : 106 Unknown points : 15

* Scoring method : Vertically
Black points : 238 White points : 102 Unknown points : 21


Black wins the game by about 135 points.

Reminder : This program doesn't decide the game, it gives an evaluation only !! .. It's up to the players to discuss the score, then resign.

All feedbacks welcome !


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-15 20:17:44)
two moves from the start

"White has a 2/3 (66%) chance to win, and 1/3 (34%) to draw" ?? ... you mean "to draw or loose" ?

Great idea, this move 0. Statistically, this is quite the same for : 1.Nf3 d5 2.Ng1 ... but 66% wins for Black seems a lot !? .. I would say about 40 to 50%, maybe less.

So, what chances for 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.d4 Ng8 .. ?

And what about 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.d4 Ng8 3.e4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Ng8 .. ? :)


Elmer Valderrama    (2006-09-16 10:20:16)
color won't matter

yes, color or turn to move at start has little importance: Black to move, he would play 0.d5 1...Nf6 now is White to make second move 2.Nf3 for example..then Black would have 66% chances to win... (or at least significantly more chances than in the usual starting position)

I mean 66% to win, 33% to draw and 1% to lose ;) (that's 34% to draw and lose)

I think the more moves are given to White(Black) the more advantage he will have, i.e. statistics would be higher to win (like 80%, 19.5% to draw and 0.5% to lose) However all this could be tested in practice, it certainly could add more picant (spice?!) to the game ;)


Elmer Valderrama    (2006-09-16 15:14:06)
5 moves in fact

..just checked the thematic tournament 0007 on this sequence, and in fact White has 5(!) extra moves at the starting position (as it's his turn after 4.Ng8). No surprise most of the games are 1-0 (there are a couple of 0-1 too)

So 5 moves are too much; same would be for 4, or 3,..to me 2 moves it's a reasonable deal for Black (i.e. if draw Black "wins")


Claude Brisson    (2006-09-18 06:40:34)
Problem with Go scorer

Hello.
Nice effort to have a go scorer, but it still needs some improvements.

Look at this game:
http://www.ficgs.com/game_2093.html

After move 138, there isn't any ambiguity on the goban.
After removing dead groups,
q1 t3 k3 s5 t9 s10 q11 h11 t12 p12 h15 t16 f16
all the intersections are either black or white.
The scoring methods says:

* Scoring method : Horizontally
Black points : 103
White points : 244
Unknown points : 14

* Scoring method : Vertically
Black points : 103
White points : 268
Unknown points : -10

Rather strange. Scores should be the same. Where do those unknown points come from?

Thanks,

Claude



Thibault de Vassal    (2006-09-18 14:16:52)
Problem with Go scorer

Hello Claude.

That's strange !? .. I just tried with the same groups :

q1 t3 k3 s5 t9 s10 q11 h11 t12 p12 h15 t16 f16


Here is the result :

* Scoring method : Horizontally
Black points : 103 White points : 254 Unknown points : 4

* Scoring method : Vertically
Black points : 103 White points : 258 Unknown points : 0

Could you try again (copy-pasting the groups) ? I can't find the problem...

Thanks in advance.


Ilmars Cirulis    (2006-09-19 16:45:57)
Thanks!

Thanks about moving my post in the right place. I put a move for white in 5.Nxf7 variation. I am waiting for black replies. Cirulis


Ilmars Cirulis    (2006-09-20 01:30:29)
Kxf2

It looks like it is easier to play without the bishop. I need black replies in that variation, Vassal.


Benjamin Aldag    (2006-09-30 15:57:58)
e4-Line !

The e4-Line is the only line, which gives white the possibility of an clear advantage. All other lines are really bad for white. The point of this opening is, to have with the black color good knights versus a bad bishop-pair of white. Roman Dzindzihasvili is the founder of this Defense and i think, "Beefeater" is not the right name. I call it "Dzindzi-Indian-Defense". There are many interesting lines and some of them, transpose the game to other openings (Pirc, Sicilian-Dragon, Kings-Indian etc.). The move 5...f5 was played to prevent black of 6.e4, but 6.e4! is the best move, white can play. I've played last year in Litomysl in a Simultan versus GM Sergey Movsesian this "Dzindzi-Indian-Defense". Sergey played 6.h4?! and after 15 moves, we draw the game. The Dzindzi-Indian-Defense is an easy to learn opening and i've got good results with it in many tourneys. Last time i've saw this Defense at the Chess-Olympic, played by players around 2400-2500. 6.e4! is the best move, but many many players don't know it and the possibility for black, to get a good result in a game is very high. I can say, i know all variations about this opening and this thematic tournament will be my first tourney here, where i will not use computer-assistence. Its funny to see, that an Engine (Rybka,Fritz etc.) dont understand the ideas behind this defense and without an opening-book, engines dont see that 6.e4! is the only way, to get an advantage.

I luv Dzindzi-Indian-Defense

Benny


Ilmars Cirulis    (2006-10-03 09:32:31)
Why?

In article 2988 black wins. If Nd7 draws, and Kf8 wins - who is more useless? IMO


Ilmars Cirulis    (2006-10-03 12:03:59)
Traxler is dead.... :D

I tried 7.. Qe7. White wins. See it in WC. Waiting for improvements for black. :D


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-10-03 13:54:48)
Traxler is not dead.... :D

Ok, sorry about 2988... but, you play for Black now ? :)

Anyway, it only means White played a wrong move before...

Good try against 7. ...Qe7, but there's 8. ...Qg5+ 9.Kxe4 Qf4+ (d5+)


Ilmars Cirulis    (2006-10-03 23:13:37)
What about...

... friendly match?
I fight with white in 6.Kxf2 Nxe4+ 7.Ke3 variation, you of course, with black.
:D
You can understand it as joke, too.


Dinesh De Silva    (2006-10-07 16:45:18)
Kramnik loses 9th game too.......

Kramnik loses another game in quick succession with the Black pieces this time. His 10th move of ....., dxc4?! was anti-positional, allowing White to expand in the centre with the Bishop pair backing it. Aftre some more mistakes, White broke through the f file by aiming at the weak f7 square.


Ilmars Cirulis    (2006-10-05 19:58:41)
To Miguel Pires.

It is nice position. Thanks!
After 17.Bxh6 gxh6 18.Qxh6 white easy win, no doubts.
But black has another move, much better, - 17.. d5. After it white wins, too. But now it is harder to win.
I found only one way for white to win after 17.. d5.
P.S. If we move queen from c7 to d8 in the position, then the sacrifice don't work.

Again - thanks for the nice position. Cirulis


Rodrigo Jaroszewski    (2006-10-10 19:18:09)
Hmmm

Even with a pawn up, Thibault? I mean, after 60...Bb6 61.Rxe5 fxe5, White being uncapable of threatening both Black pawns or moving his King towards either Black's passed pawn or his own pawn... Of course, it might come to a lock later on, but it does seem more promising than allowing the Rooks to stay.

However, you did give me the answer to my question. Thanks!


Dinesh De Silva    (2006-10-12 14:27:47)
Re:

Game twelve is proceeding. Kram. (White) has a launched a minority attack on the queenside, while Top. (Black) is trying for a kingside attack. Because of the sharp, unbalanced characteristics of the position, this may well turn out to be the deciding game of the championship.


Dinesh De Silva    (2006-10-13 13:54:02)
Tie Break Game No. 1 Is A Draw

Top. (White) & Kram. (Black) drew their 1st tie break game in 47 moves just now.


Dinesh De Silva    (2006-10-13 14:57:27)
Kram. Wins Tie Break Game No. 2

Kram. (White) strategically outplayed Top. (Black) in tie break game no. 2 in 45 moves just now. After Top. conceded the bishop pair, he was forced on the backfoot in an ending, and went down a bishop for just two pawns, at which point he resigned.


Wolfgang Utesch    (2006-10-19 20:47:01)
Mate in 292 moves

The white pawn h4 cannot reach its position without striking the black g-pawn - but this g-pawn is still there! Wolfgang


Wolfgang Utesch    (2006-10-19 20:56:51)
Mate in 292 moves

More accurate: The white pawn h4 cannot reach its position without striking the black g- and h-pawns - but this g- and h-pawns are still there! In combination with the black g-double pawn an the black h5-pawn, which position need to strike the white g- and h-pawns is it unpossible to reach out of the normal chess start position! Wolfgang


Gino Figlio    (2006-10-20 07:56:02)
too many pawn captures for white

4 white pawns are still in their original post. There are however 3 doubled pawns. The minimum number of pawn captures to achieve this would be 7, but black has only lost 4 pieces(2 rooks and 2 bishops); therefore the position is illegal.


Wolfgang Utesch    (2006-10-20 09:39:00)
Mate in 292 moves

Yes, Gino, you are right! All pawns on board, so the double pawns can reach their position only by striking of other figures. For this position black should have had 9 (!) other figures (h4 by 2 figures; g5 by 3; e6 by 4) - but only 4 are missing. Wolfgang


Elmer Valderrama    (2006-10-20 21:55:18)
retrograde analysis

from math.harvard.edu

"Legal position (n.): a position that can be reached from the initial array by game consisting entirely of legal moves, however bizarre. Conventionally every chess problem should have a legal position. Naturally then, an illegal position is a position that cannot be reached by a legal game. For instance, a position in which one side has more than 8 pawns, or has both White and Black Kings in check, is illegal (why?). So is any position with a White Bishop on h1 and White pawn on g2 (why?), such as the following mutual Zugzwang (q.v.), which Lewis Stiller discovered in the course of an exhaustive computer search: White Kg6, Bh1, Pg2; Black Kg4, Pg3. The Kniest position White Kc8,Pb6; Black Ka8,Pa7 (seen above under Helpmate) is legal BTM, but not WTM since Black is in ``retro-stalemate'': Black could not have made a legal move to reach this position. [Thus this position can be set as a Helpmate in Two but not a Mate in One (or ``helpmate in 0.5'').] There are positions that can be recognized as illegal only after extensive retrograde analysis. To prove that a position is legal, one need only exhibit a single legal game reaching the position; such a game is called a proof game. Some retrograde analysis may still be needed to construct a proof game."

I bet nowadays there exist a problem solving chess engine which can give such a 'proof game' in 0.0001milisec (as the moves maybe bizarre, no need to evaluate positions, just to check them for legality)


Wolfgang Utesch    (2006-10-21 12:09:00)
Best game

The "Best Game" should be a figurehead of the FICS-Site - but is it? I don't think so. That so an exotic opening experiment (particularly with black) will run in a real loosing position, is not very suprising. And also the praised last move is found by several engines in a very short time! What we (this site) need is a very high classed game with surprising twists - which engines never can find. And it must be with very good comments on most moves. Looking for this - that is the real challenge for all of us! Wolfgang


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-10-21 12:11:22)
Tactics / server chess

You just have to be a bit more creative or to play different openings in your 3 games as White & Black in a tournament... Anyway, with online databases it's quite easy to know any player style & opening book.

There are many psychological tactics with server chess & CC time controls IMO, ie. it may be quite important to manage your unlucky opponent spirit during a tournament :)


Wayne Lowrance    (2006-10-22 05:13:08)
Best Game

Without revealing my engine it find Qf8+ in 5 seconds, so your statement needs correcting. The game is "probobly lost accoring to my engine. Excuse my bluntness. But what a stupid opening for black. Thats where all the trouble began. I would not try and defend the black position here....My two cents worth Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-10-31 10:54:18)
Go : pro game videos on Youtube

An incredible mistake in a Go game by a professional 9p player. Pressure is high too :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oj58O_qHBAU

"The player of the Black stones was Nakano Hironari 9p and the White stones were played by Ishida Yoshio 9p of joseki dictionary fame. This is part of a broadcast of a game from a TV tournament in Japan. The announcer who comes on in the middle says that there isn't time in the program to show the whole game so they are skipping to the end."

From GoDiscussions forum :
http://www.godiscussions.com/forum/showthread.php?t=732


Daniel De Noose    (2006-11-02 01:45:41)
Pas du tout car voici le mail ...

que j'ai reçu de notification :

-----------------------------
[Event "FICGS__CHESS__WCH_STAGE_1_GROUP_17__000001"]
[Site "FICGS"]
[Date "2006.7.1"]
[Round "1"]
[White "De Noose,Daniel"]
[Black "Ould Ahmed,Samy"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteElo "1470"]
[BlackElo "2166"]

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.O-O Bg4 6.h3 h5 7.d3 Qf6 8.Nbd2 Bd6 9.Nc4 Bxf3 10.Qxf3 Qxf3 11.gxf3 Ne7 12.f4 exf4 13.e5 Bc5 14.Bxf4 Ng6 15.Be3 Bxe3 16.fxe3 b5 17.Na5 Nxe5 18.Rf5 f6 19.d4 Nf7 20.Nxc6 Kd7 0-1

Move sent : 2006.10.29 - 11:35:31
Move replied : 2006.10.30 - 22:27:44

Non et j\'ai essayé ici mais cela ne me plaît pas ...
-----------------------------------

[j'ai volontairement coupé la fin du message car le reste ne regarde pas les autres utilisateurs.

Comme tu peux le voir c'est son coup qui est affiché mais le message est le mien ! C'est celui que je lui ai envoyé en jouant mon coup qui n'apparait pas càd 21.Cb4 !



Wolfgang Utesch    (2006-11-12 13:42:38)
White to move!

Is there a way to win for White and if it is - which could be the only move to realize this? ChessPosition (see diagram) Black's last move has been 49...Qa7. Has there been any better move for Black? Have attention to the proposals of your chess engines!


Wolfgang Utesch    (2006-11-12 15:21:39)
Chess problem

Hello Thibault, I think you are wrong! This position is one of my last finished games on ICCF and one of my best - at least from this position to the end. It seems to be very important to find first the better way for Black instead of his last move. Greetings, Wolfgang


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-11-12 15:29:58)
Chess problem

Ok, you got me :)

I'll wait for someone else to find the solution, but I would love to try to defend this position with Black against you, maybe in Wikichess or by email. If you're interested, of course...


Wolfgang Utesch    (2006-11-12 17:04:21)
Black to move!

It seems to be an easy way for White after 50.g5! - but wait and see. The Black defending resources are not to underestimate. FEN= 4bk2/q3r1p1/1R1p1p1p/3P1PP1/4PK1P/4QN2/8/8 b - - 0 50


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-11-12 17:46:57)
Black to move!

Ok, that's quite funny I didn't consider the most natural move because it's a chess problem :) .. g5 is also chosen by most engines quite quickly.

Anyway, the win is still to prove. I'll try some lines in wikichess.

Note : A new feed (RSS) will be available for wikichess very soon.


Wolfgang Utesch    (2006-11-12 17:57:17)
Black to move!

Not this move but the way behind that is the secret - in my opinion. Let us see!


Ilmars Cirulis    (2006-11-13 13:10:22)
Challenge!

I think that
- Latvian gambit 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5
and
- Traxler counterattack 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 Bc5
is won by white.

So I challenge everyone serious player who wants to play Latvian gambit or Traxler counterattack (for example, Thibault Vassal :D ) with black.

My e-mail is ilmars.cirulis@gmail.com

Ilmars Cirulis. :D


Dinesh De Silva    (2006-11-15 02:17:33)
Re:

He will most probably play semi closed openings & defences, which gives a slight/miniscule advantage or equality somewhere, avoiding early tactical open positions. So we might not see any Sicilian at all as Black in his repertoire. He'll try his best to outwit the computer by sometimes introducing deviations or novelties in the first 25 moves or so.


Ilmars Cirulis    (2006-11-15 16:40:51)
Nice endgame, too! :)

Ok, I will look for clear win!

For me that endgame is easier than another one. Here black has only one piece instead of two. :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-11-15 16:41:25)
Out of topic :)

Ilmars, it is no worth finding another way to win for White :) .. Please help me to save the Black position after 50.g5! .. that's real challenge !


Ilmars Cirulis    (2006-11-15 16:44:48)
Why? :)

Actually I think that after 50.g5 score is 1-0 already.

OK, I will try to find something for black.


Don Groves    (2006-11-20 07:33:54)
Go : Komi

I feel 7.5 points komi is too much for some Go games. Since we do not use handicaps (which is good, IMHO) should not komi be reduced if White is a higher rated player than Black? For players of equal ability, 7.5 komi is fine, but when I must give Sebastian Ilie 7.5 points, it seems a joke. He beats me by 200 anyway ;-) I suggest komi be reduced by one point for every 100 (or perhaps 200) rating points difference (to a minimum of 0.5) when White is the superior player. What do others think about this?


Lionel Vidal    (2006-11-20 21:29:31)
You seems in advance :-)

Well, considering the results of last year pro games (almost a perfect 50-50 result, according to my rather large but admittedly incomplete database) I am not sure a komi change from 6.5 will occur soon, at least in the japanese pro scene... And the number of recent games in gobase that ends in 1 or 1/2 points difference is astonishing :-) (not really significant, I know, as pros have the capacity to keep a tiny edge till the end, reducing it to simplify the game... but still :-))
Anyway, for us, simple and humble go mortals, that does not change much :-)

(but even at my low level I tend to be more aggressive in my fuseki while playing with an opponent of my level or stronger when the komi is 7.5 instead of say 5.5... so considering the increase/decrease (black/white) of aggressive attitude, maybe it is important for most of us because the feeling of a game might eventually change)


Lionel Vidal    (2006-11-21 13:47:55)
Komi vs handicap

IMO, Thibault is quite right: it would make no sense to increase Komi instead of playing with handicap stones.
To give points or to give stones is not the same: the very nature of handicap stones is pedagogic, that is to help *both* players to improve. Go strategy is complex, but can often been seen as a delicate balance between power (thickness) and territory (points). Handicap stones are put on Hoshi on purpose: to help the weaker player to build and use thickness, the most difficult concept to master compare to territory, where a beginner can actually count concrete points (or so he believes at first :-)
Playing at 9 handicap stones, or giving, say, 100 points komi is not the same and never will be: the weaker player has no chance with such a komi, because he will have no anchor to help his stones live and will probably be completely destroyed... but much worse, he cannot improve his play easily because he'll never be in a position where he could *try* to think strategically.
IMO, true go is not non-handicap go, but a fair game where the tactical and strategic true nature of the game is preserved. How could we say that, for instance, Dosaku 'Go Saint' games are not true go, when he was at least one stone stronger than all his fellow pro players, giving them Black (no komi at that time) or one,two stones?
The beauty of handicap go is that IMO it *is* still true go :-) You can compare to chess where giving a piece, say a N as Lasker used to do, change the strategic nature of the game through a controlled exchange policy.


Don Groves    (2006-11-29 23:01:22)
Go: Komi revisited

Forget what I wrote ;) Chinese komi is only 3.75 but they both add it to white and subtract it from black!? Thus, 7.5 added to white gives the same result. In one place I read about this, they left out the second part, which led to my confusion.


Ilmars Cirulis    (2006-12-11 10:26:41)
1.e4 e5 2.Bb5

Black has comfortable play after it.
It doesn't mean that black wins. :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2006-12-23 05:26:35)
The games

Here are the games so far :)


Traxler counter-attack :

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 Bc5 5.Nxf7 Bxf2+ 6.Kxf2 Nxe4+ 7.Ke3 Qh4 8.g3 Nxg3 9.hxg3 Qd4+ 10.Kf3 d5 11.Rh4 e4+ 12.Kg2 0-0 13.Bb3 Rxf7 14.Qg1 Qf6 15.Rf4 Qe6 16.Nc3 Qh3+ 17.Kf2 Be6 18.Nxd5 Nd4 19.Rxf7 Bxf7 20.Nf4 Qf5 21.Bxf7+ Qxf7 22.Qd1 g5 23.Qg4 Qf6 24.Kg2 Rf8 25.b3 Nxc2 26.Rb1 Ne1+ 27.*

Latvian gambit :

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4 fxe4 4.Nxe5 d5 5.Qh5+ g6 6.Nxg6 hxg6 7.Qxh8 Kf7 8.Qd4 Nf6 9.Be2 c5 10.Qe3 Nc6 11.O-O Nd4 12.Na3 Bd6 13.f4 Ng4 14.Bxg4 Bxg4 15.h3 Qh4 16.d3 Ne2+ 17.Kh2 d4 0-1


So result will be most probably Cirulis : 0,5 - de Vassal : 1,5

Thanks Ilmars for very interesting games ! These openings are really good weapons... (for Black :))


Steve Sabean    (2006-12-23 16:58:08)
Traxler/Wilkes-Barre

I have heard from many players of a wide range of strength that the Traxler is busted for Black. The trouble is, none of them appear to have proof. A few years ago, I played in a Traxler thematic in IECG. I had a great time, learned a lot, and managed second place overall. My own assessment is: unclear, but Black is probably OK. So, why not have a Traxler thematic tournament here on FICGS, to settle the matter once and for all. :D Maybe it could be a double round robin, to be fair to those who feel that one side or the other has the advantage. I would sign on for such a tournament. Nice Latvian, btw.


Steve Sabean    (2006-12-25 22:45:03)
Sounds like a challenge

The gauntlet has been thrown down! How about this: We play two games, I will play Black in both. In one, White plays 5 Bxf7+ and in the other, White plays 5 Nxf7. We could play here if M. de Vassal would be kind enough to set it up, or if not, then e-mail is OK.


Ilmars Cirulis    (2006-12-26 13:14:55)
HA HA HA! :)

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 Bc5 5.Nxf7 Bxf2+ 6.Kxf2 Nxe4+ 7.Ke3 Qh4 8.g3 Nxg3 9.hxg3 Qd4+ 10.Kf3 d5 11.Rh4 e4+ 12.Kg2 0-0 13.Bb3 Rxf7 14.Rf4 Rxf4 15.gxf4 Be6 16.Nc3 Rf8 17.Qh5 Rxf4! 18.Qe8+ Rf8 19.Qxe6+ Kh8 20.Nd1 e3 and black has at least a draw! Funny!


Ilmars Cirulis    (2006-12-26 13:48:40)
16.d3 looks good! :)

16.d3 Rf8 (again! :D) 17.Qg1 Qf6? 18.dxe4 and white stands very promising.

Better for black is 17.. Qxg1+ 18.Kxg1 exd3 19.cxd3 Nb4 20.d4 (20.Nc3 Nxd3 21.Nxd5 Nxc1 22.Rxc1 c6 23.Ne7+ Kf7 24.Nf5 Bxb3 25.axb3 Rd8 - draw IMO) and white have little chance to win.

I must look for something better. :)


Ilmars Cirulis    (2006-12-26 14:48:40)
What about 13.Nc3?

Now I remember why I didn't like a move 13.Nc3.

Look at it:
13.Nc3 dxc4 14.Qh5 Be6 15.Ne2 Qd5 16.Ng5 e3+ 17.Kg1 h6 18.Nxe6 Qxe6 19.dxe3 Qd6 and black has serious chances to draw.


Miguel Pires    (2006-12-26 22:56:40)
Thibault de Vassal

That's correct but if you play the same oppening with withe and black against the same opponent that is going to help you improve, because you don't wana enter in "his" line


Elmer Valderrama    (2007-01-02 20:43:37)
Blitz correspondence chess

Programming problems you mean?

In a 1-game match I would gladly play Black all the time :) -provided that if draw Black "wins" of course-

It's tricky to make a fair 1-game match; the old proposal of giving odds to White (first two consecutive moves in a MUST WIN -other result loses- situation) would give White -I reckon- 60-to-70% chance to win, which is about the same odds as playing Black for a draw. But it's something new, which could be tested. Here I could play Black just to try to prove me wrong, lol.




Thibault de Vassal    (2007-01-03 01:08:07)
Blitz correspondence chess

Of course not :)

I mean I don't think everyone can play 2 games one 'today' and one 'tomorrow', or even be sure they really could play 'tomorrow'... There would be problems for sure with a "rendez-vous" system.

The advantage of playing White is probably not much greater (maybe not greater at all) than playing Black and to know who's your opponent, particularly with a standard time control, what do you think ?

Anyway everything is possible if no solution is clearly best, but we must avoid the old proposal with White playing ie. the 2 first moves IMO. It may be a funny variant to offer, but this is not real chess game.


Elmer Valderrama    (2007-01-03 11:00:42)
Blitz correspondence chess

Well, as long as it's an unrated chess game, you can call it Silver Thematic and virtually any variation would qualify as a real chess game..

The way the winner is chosen in a 1-game (or 2-game for that matter) match is what is debatable, it's a little advantage to have White that's why having Black would be good if the color decides.

I think that players would agree to enter a tournament under some conditions (e.g. as playing on Satuday 3pm & Sunday 3pm), people were/are happy to enter the Chessbase "marathon" (freestyle with 3 rounds per day) and most here hang around making several moves per day in their CC games every day, so it's a matter of agreement about the appropiate time (easier to achieve with just two players (2-game match) than a tournament of course)

Maybe a poll would help although the players who would enter these events may not be even registered to FICGS yet, lol


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-01-21 13:48:44)
Go and chess, IGN Goama newsletter

From IGN Goama newsletter by Alexander Dinerchtein - http://www.gogame.info


Go and Chess ­ Two Games, Shared Experiences

Chess and go show are similar in many ways, yet it's always strange to see how the masters of each game try to "invent the wheel", instead of benefiting from the knowledge of their colleagues.

Let's consider sharing experiences!

These ideas can be useful even for strong Asian Go professionals:

1. Currently, only a few pros use Go databases and programs for studying. It is easy to find commentaries, written by 9-dan masters, which state that a move is new and has never been played before. Yet if one checks such moves in Go databases, one can sometimes find up to 100 examples from professional games. How can they cheat the readers who study these commentaries?

Once in Korea, I showed the Bigo Assistant program (similar to GoGod, MoyoGo and SmartGo) to Lee Sedol's brother Lee Sanghun, 5-dan, who is the director of a large children's Go school. He was surprised and said that the program looked very useful, and he added that he had never met this kind of program before. He even suggested deleting all amateur games and games played on Go servers, because of their low quality. I promised to order the programs and to install them on the school's computers if he liked this idea, but he did not follow up. Lee Sanghun, 5-dan was not able to break the traditions of his forefathers …

2. Even such top chess players as Kasparov, Kramnik and Topalov enlist the support of trainers during important tournaments and matches. During the Communist era, almost every Russian grandmaster worked on behalf of world championship candidates. Our government forced them to help, to show them new moves and ideas. Those who refused to help were punished severely: for example, sometimes a player would be prohibited from playing in tournaments abroad and would be refused foreign visas.

We do not see this in Go. Everyone thinks only about his or her own self. Do you know who is currently assisting Lee Changho? I don't know, either!

3. I would like to say a few words about playing technique. Chess players often used to write the move on paper first and then make it on the board. This helps to avoid impulsive moves and to prevent blunders. Go masters record the game afterwards, and so one can often find terrible mistakes, such as overlooking ataris and recapturing ko without playing a ko threat first. As an example you may see Black's move number 271 from this game: http://www.go4go.net/v2/modules/collection/sgfview.php?id=10828 I am sure that if a player looked at their move at least twice ­ before they write it on paper and after ­ they would not make such mistakes.

4. Even top Go tournaments are usually run by the knock-out system so we often see sensational results. Mightn’t it be reasonable to think about increasing the number of games in each round? If rounds were best-of-three (in case of time constraints, it would be possible to use blitz time controls for the third game), it would help to minimize sensations.

How about organising a definitive World Go Championship? Chess players have contested one for more than 100 years, and competitions for this World Championship have revealed the very best players of each generation. In Go it's harder to tell which player is true champion. In 2006, for instance, one international tournament was won by Lee Changho and another one by Lee Sedol, while Cho U won the largest amount of prize money. Whom can we call the World Champion? Who can say which tournament is the most important : LG, Samsung, Fujitsu, Chunlan or another? We don't even have a unified rating system …

If we determined a single World Go Champion, he might earn the same degree of popularity as Garry Kasparov achieved in chess, and this could have a very positive influence on Go popularity around the world!


Michael Finkelstein    (2007-01-24 19:29:25)
Playback

I used the magnifying glass, as suggested. That gets rid of the problem of the screen dropping a quarter of a page, but it adds its own problem - I cannot flip the board and look at it from my perspective when I am black. I have tried double spacing and triple spacing and still I cannot paragraph in these posts. These flaws in the feature interface, and others that I have mentioned before, may seem minor but detract from my experience here.


Ron Keyston    (2007-01-29 17:27:38)
"Major" Deep Fritz 10 Bug

I've confirmed this problem on two different computers with completely different hardware and different operating systems. I've also sent the problem off to Chessbase, but have not yet gotten much of a response. If anyone else has Deep Fritz 10, would you mind giving this a try and reporting back with your results? Also, if anyone has the non-Deep version of Fritz 10, I'd be interested in knowing if it is also affected by this problem.

Input a game into Deep Fritz 10 and get to a point in the game where it is possible for black to castle long. Now save the game into a database, close the game and then open it back up from the database. If you either turn on infinite analysis, or just try to make the move, black is not able to castle long...Fritz assumes that it is an illegal move.

Furthermore, if you castle long BEFORE saving the game into the database, then save it and re-open it, then go to the position after black has castled queenside and turn on infinite analysis, the analysis is "messed up." Either the analysis text is invisible, or it reports impossible lines, or the evaluation score is very obviously wrong. This should be enough info for anyone to give the test a try, but if you want some specific examples, please let me know.

Ron


Ron Keyston    (2007-01-29 19:04:14)
Specifics and Examples

OK, one PC is a 3.2GHz P4 w/1GB RAM running XP Pro. 256MB Hashtables with an ~800MB Maximum possible. The other PC is an Athlon X2 4600+ w/2GB RAM running Vista Ultimate (RTM.) It has 1GB Hashtables with ~1.5GB Maximum Possible. I can pretty much guarantee that it is not a hashtable issue though as the problem is with the legality of a move and only arises after saving into a database, closing the game and then re-opening it from the database. Also, if I open the same saved game from the database into Fritz 9, castling long as black is perfectly OK.

As for some examples, I will give the same five games that I sent to Chessbase. Some of these are contrived examples, whereas some are from my games here at FICGS:

1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qd6 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.Bc4 Bg4 6.O-O Nc6 7.d4

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 dxe4 5.Nxe4 Be7 6.Bxf6 gxf6 7.Nf3 b6 8.Bc4 Bb7 9.Qe2 Nd7 10.O-O-O c6 11.Rhe1 Qc7 12.g3

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 c4 7.Qg4 g6 8.Nf3 Qa5 9.Bd2 Nh6 10.Qh3 Nf5 11.g4 Nxd4 12.cxd4 Qb6 13.Bg2 Nc6 14.Qh6 Nxd4 15.O-O Bd7 16.Bg5 Ba4 17.Nxd4 Qxd4 18.Qg7 Rf8 19.Be3 Qxg4 20.Bc5

1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qd6 4.d4 Nf6 5.Nf3 a6 6.Be3 Nc6 7.Qd2 Bf5 8.Bd3 Bg4 9.Be2 e6 10.O-O-O

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 c4 7.Qg4 g6 8.Nf3 Qa5 9.Bd2 Nh6 10.Qh3 Nf5 11.g4 Nxd4 12.cxd4 Qb6 13.Bg2 Nc6 14.Qh6 Nxd4 15.O-O Bd7 16.Qg7

In all five examples, it is black to move from the final position. Also, in all five examples, castling long/queen-side is perfectly legal and likely one of the best moves. BEFORE the game(s) is/are saved into the database, Fritz allows black to castle long (and it is at or near the top line in infinite analysis mode.) AFTER saving the game into a database, closing the game window, and re-opening the game from the database, Fritz treats castling long as an illegal move.


Elmer Valderrama    (2007-02-10 13:55:59)
teddy-bear-free chess

That teddy bear is worth 350 ELO, my guess.

Actually everyone has his 'teddy bear': it might be a blue shirt, the black shoes, or taking even his own mother/wife to the games (no punk intended to concerned players ;) ..All of these get scanned so I do not see any good reason why the teddy bear should not be scanned both before and after the game. If game is lost by the child there is no need to scan it of course. If game is won, then the teddy bear must be confiscated temporarily for further examination. Measures should be taken to shift the child's preference to any other object or person, as this teddy bear is starting to look rather suspicious to me/many, and annoying to his opponents who would then bring on dummies, milk bottles even nappies making this scenario rather...childish, unacceptable for a intellectual game as chess. Moreover, there would appear chess variants named after this toy, as 'the Teddy Bear Attack', or 'the deadly Teddy Bear Gambit' which could be played while singing 'teddy bear, teddy bear touch your nose, teddy bear, teddy bear touch your toes, teddy bear, teddy bear touch the ground, teddy bear teddy bear turn around', any of which would kill the game. In fact if nothing is done against this teddy bear, hereby I announce that I would quit chess, rapid chess, blitz chess, postal chess, email chess, server chess and correspondence chess (where admittedly is difficult to guess if there is any teddy bear around) I will then switch to a table game where teddy bears aren't going to be seen for a while, like Poker, or Roulette, all 18+ games

Yours in Teddy-bear-free Chess,


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-02-24 00:12:00)
Carlsen vs. Topalov

Black to move (of course).

Chessbase : "In fact Carlsen shows the horrified former world champion the defence immediately after he had resigned"

Horrified, at least...


Samy Ould Ahmed    (2007-03-04 12:47:22)
My im impressions in inglish :)

Playing with black pieces is really a nightmare for me in advanced chess lol


Samy Ould Ahmed    (2007-03-08 16:19:54)
Mikhail Umansky-Samy_Ould-Ahmed

[Event "5th Freestyle Main Event"] [Site "playchess.com #091606"] [Date "2007.03.04"] [Round "7"] [White "Mikhail Umansky"] [Black "Samy_Ould-Ahmed"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "E04"] 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. g3 d5 4. Bg2 dxc4 5. Nf3 Nc6 6. O-O Rb8 7. Nc3 a6 8. e4 Be7 9. Qe2 Nxd4 10. Nxd4 Qxd4 11. Rd1 Qc5 12. e5 Nd7 13. Ne4 Qb5 14. a4 Qb3 15. Rd4 b5 16. Qg4 Bf8 17. axb5 Qxb5 18. Bf4 Qxb2 19. Qd1 Qb3 20. Qh5 Qc2 21. Rdd1 Be7 22. Rac1 Qa2 23. Ng5 g6 24. Qh6 Bf8 25. Qh3 Rb6 26. Bf1 Qb2 27. Rxc4 c5 28. Ne4 h6 29. Bg2 Be7 30. Rc3 g5 31. Bc1 Qb4 32. Qh5 Bb7 33. Re3 c4 34. Nd6+ Bxd6 35. exd6 Bxg2 36. Rxe6+ Kd8 37. Qxf7 Rf8 38. Qe7+ Kc8 39. Rf6 Rd8 40. Kxg2 Qa4 41. Rf5 Qc6+ 42. Kg1 c3 43. Qe1 c2 44. Rd2 Rb1 45. h3 Kb8 46. Kh2 Qc3 47. Rf7 Ne5 48. Rf5 Nc6 49. Rfd5 h5 50. d7 a5 51. R5d3 Qc4 52. Re3 a4 53. Re8 Qc3 0-1


Khaled Toutaoui    (2007-03-08 18:18:52)
do you know this sicilian...

in one of my games i play with the blacks and after 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 i played 4... e6 so e6!? or e6?! what do you think...my opponent played after that 5.e5 Nd5 6.Ne4 Qc7 7.f4 Bb7 8.c4 Bb4+ 9.Ke2...and what do you think about the position...thanx a lot for all..:)


Gavin Wilson    (2007-03-10 00:24:36)
Kingston Defence

Thanks for correcting the Wikipedia link, Thibault. I wouldn't claim that the Defence is 'fully' described yet on Wikichess. I am gradually documenting my Internet games with the Defence as I complete them. The most critical line for Black is definitely 1.e4 e6 2.d4 f5 3.ef ef 4.Bd3 and it will need considerable exploration before I'm happy with Black's resulting positions. Sadly I have mislaid my only copy of my own 1989 monograph, so I'm rebuilding the Defence partly from memory and partly from scratch.


Elmer Valderrama    (2007-03-10 15:27:33)
Playchess Freestyle Tournaments

Interesting and true observation, Thibault.

What about the format 2h/40moves displayed under Money Tournaments in Waiting Lists? Maybe this is equally harder (in order to beat Rybka) that at 1h+15sec (!?)

And second question is why do you think Black needs so many moves to have winning chances in the proposed Silver/Gold Thematic game, or a better question could be: Do you think White can get a draw after that sequence: 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.Ng1 d5 3.Nf3 c5 4.Ng1 Black to move. -->assuming the idea is that if the game is drawn White would win the 1-game match--.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-03-10 15:43:17)
Playchess Freestyle Tournaments

Hi Elmer.

1h+15 is worth 1h10/40 moves... 2h/40 moves is the longest time control before correspondence chess (games that don't finish the same day it started) and I think it's long enough so that human can do something else than operate Rybka :)

About Silver/Gold Thematic game, if White/Black obtains much more than 50%, I'll change the opening until to find one that give about 50% chances. What do you think ? .. About this opening, I think chances are about 50%, I would play it with both colors :)


Elmer Valderrama    (2007-03-10 15:56:59)
Playchess Freestyle Tournaments

..Well, I would play only Black there, so I guess I know who could be my opponent in the first Gold thematic -isn't there a Platinum with 1000 EUR at stake?! ;)


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-03-10 22:40:51)
Final standings

Morozevich beats Topalov in a dead draw ending at round 13, Morozevich beats Svidler with Black in the next & last round... In the final standings, after a horrible start, Morozevich is second with Carlsen ! (who lost to Peter Leko in the last round). Topalov is last with Leko. Really incredible tournament, very hard to predict all long.

Vishy Anand wins the tournament by one full point !


Final standings :

1/ Anand : 8,5
2/ Morozevich : 7,5
3/ Carlsen : 7,5
4/ Aronian : 7
5/ Svidler : 7
6/ Ivanchuk : 6,5
7/ Topalov : 6
8/ Leko : 6


... even harder that lottery :)))


Don Groves    (2007-03-11 07:04:51)
Draw on perfect play?

If this turns out to be true, then Black will never lose another game!


Graham Woodcock    (2007-03-29 17:03:09)
game 6909 query

Regarding game 6909 (on Best Games), can someone explain the thinking behind 10.exf5 when white could have moved 10.gxf6 instead? Also, why did black then choose 10. ... d5, which allowed 11.gxf6 when the f6 knight could have been moved to safety on black’s 10th move? I’m sure there must be some good reasoning for those moves, but I can’t see it. Cheers.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-03-29 17:53:03)
game 6909

There was great games following this opening in the past, I remember particularly one by Judit Polgar.

Ok, let's see.. 10. ...Ng8 then.. brr, this position is simply frightening, does it really need an explanation :) .. if 10.Nfd7 then 11.Qh5, 12.O-O-O actually there's no particular line to justify 10. ...d5 IMO, the attack simply looks so strong in other cases... At least it obviously deals with obvious weaknesses in Black's position by giving some air.

Any other try to explain this hard opening ? :)


Marc Lacrosse    (2007-03-29 19:00:16)
Double RR tournaments ?

Seven players in a tournament is a good number

A larger number would lead to longer waiting time before a tournament actually begins.

But with such a small number of players being white or black against a given opponent may be decisive for tournament win.

So my suggestion : double round robin tournaments with a smaller number of players (five ?).

At five players, completing the full list of players is faster than for a seven-players single RR one and everybody plays 8 games with the advantage that no colour advantage/disadvantage exists against any opponent.

Your opinion ?


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-03-29 19:51:24)
Double round-robin tournaments

Single round-robin tournaments with 7 players remains the very best option in my opinion. Shorter waiting time, more opponents... Playing White or Black against a particular opponent have consequences particularly in WCH tournaments, that is a choice but as there's no perfect system, the idea was to organize more cycles (about one every 6 months) for more chances. This way I'm convinced the best player will reach the final quite quickly :)

Double round robin tournaments with five players will be organized for special events (by the way this formula will not decrease the waiting time before a tournament starts... the more games in a tournament, the longer waiting time to begin another one, it doesn't depend on the number of players only)

Finally I think the idea of double round-robin tournaments with 5 players could be a good one for a new category, with a different time control (maybe longer ?!) .. What do you think ?


Nicola Lupinacci    (2007-03-29 21:01:14)
Double round-robin tournaments

I think it is a good idea.
Playing 2 times against an opponent (whit White and Black) is more exiting, specially in WCH tournaments


Jason Repa    (2007-04-07 05:57:23)
Double RR tournaments

I disagree. I think that it has a very significant influence on the result. If you get Whites against the stronger players and Blacks against the weaker ones, you are getting a big advantage over someone who is not. IMO, it greatly adds to the luck factor. I have the most fun from fair competitions where things are balanced.


Jason Repa    (2007-04-21 10:35:27)
WCH Rules

Achim Mueller wrote: "In case of having 2 or more players with the same points at the top the player with the highest rating will qualify." This is completely logical. The higher rated player will tend to be the stronger of the group, especially if he isn't outscored by the lower rated player, so it's obvious that if you have to choose between two that are equal in points, you take the one that is more likely to be stronger. Can you think of a better and more fair way to choose between the two? Also, I disagree with your comments about how someone "can easily play on draw". This is completely wrong. Even with the Black pieces, games can be and are won all the time, even at the very highest level of chess. Top GM's constantly are winning with black, and what is arguably considered the top computer in the world "Hydra" was defeated more than once by a garden-variety GM who had the black pieces. Regardless of color and regardless of rating, chess is a game of skill and if you need a win against a certain opponent, the onus is on you to draw on all of your resources, including choosing the type of oppening that will not lend itself to an easy draw. A weak player who doesn't understand these concepts will have no chance in subsequent rounds in a tournament anyway and shouldn't worry about advancing. My experience is proof also. I had the black pieces against a significantly higher rated opponent in my WCH group and I beat him to secure my advancement.


Achim Mueller    (2007-04-21 14:50:38)
Some answers

1) If the "higher rating" rule is best practise, as some players here do state, why isn't it used at _any_ FIDE tournaments? They have everything from SB, direct result, more wins, more wins with black pieces, but never ever used rating.

2) Even if it may not that easy to play for a draw ... I guess besides the fact that you get half a point as a gift it's also undoubtfull an advantage at least in correspondence chess to _know_ that a draw will help you, if you are the better rated player.

And this is definitely true in a tournament with only 4 players where there is only one qualifier.

Nonetheless you have all the right to use every rule you like. And as long as a player participates he "accepts" theses rules. That's what I also do, though I didn't know before that we are only 4 players and though I wasn't aware of this certain rule before.

But I also have all the rights to make future decisions regarding playing a qualifier here depending on the rules.

Ciao

acepoint


Marc Lacrosse    (2007-04-22 11:59:10)
win against Anand :-)

Yesterday world number one Vishy Anand played a 90-minute simul against 19 opponents on ICC to raise funds for his favorite charity in India.
I had bought a seat and intended to play an unorthodox opening if possible.
I happened to be lucky enough to get the opportunity to play my favorite Basman-Sale sicilian defence...
... and I won !

In the very next days I will publish the game with a few comments on my site at chessbazaar.mlweb.info

This is the most beautiful day of my chess life :-)

Marc

the game :

[Event "ICC 90 5 u"]
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2007.04.21"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Anand"]
[Black "Bluesette"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ICCResult "White resigns"]
[WhiteElo "2786"]
[BlackElo "2155"]
[Opening "Sicilian defense"]
[ECO "B41"]
[NIC "SI.41"]
[Time "12:04:06"]
[TimeControl "5400+5"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Bc5 5. Nb3 Bb6 6. Nc3 Ne7 7. Bf4 d5 8. exd5 Nxd5 9. Nxd5 exd5 10. Bb5+ Nc6 11. O-O O-O 12. c3 Bf5 13. Qd2 a6 14. Bxc6 bxc6 15. Be3 Bc7 16. Bf4 Bb6 17. Rfe1 Qf6 18. Be5 Qg6 19. Qf4 Be4 20. Qg3 Rfe8 21. Bd4 Bc7 22. Qxg6 Bxg6 23. Nc5 a5 24. b3 Bf5 25. f3 h5 26. g3 f6 27. Kf2 Kf7 28. Na4 g5 29. Rxe8 Rxe8 30. Bb6 Bxb6+ 31. Nxb6 Rb8 32. Na4 Rb5 33. Rd1 Be6 34. Ke3 c5 35. Kd2 c4 36. bxc4 dxc4 37. Kc1 Rf5 38. Rf1 Re5 39. Rf2 Re3 40. f4 gxf4 41. Rxf4 Re1+ 42. Kb2 Re2+ 43. Ka3 Rxh2 44. Nc5 Bg4 45. Ne4 f5 46. Rf2 Rxf2 47. Nxf2 Kf6 48. Ka4 Kg5 49. Kxa5 f4 50. gxf4+ Kxf4 {White resigns}
0-1


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-04-22 12:32:08)
win against Anand :-)

Great & congrats ! :) .. such a thing does not happen every day. It's a real honor to beat a top class player, even in a simul - and with Black. (would have been even more pleasant in "real life" for sure)

Do you still play some FIDE events / tournaments, Marc ?


Nick Burrows    (2007-04-30 16:31:33)
T vs K - Cochrane Gambit

Heres the game Thibault!?
[Event "XVI Ciudad de Linares 99"] [Site "Linares ESP"] [Date "1999.??.??"] [EventDate "?"] [Round "8"] [Result "1/2-1/2"] [White "Veselin Topalov"] [Black "Vladimir Kramnik"] [ECO "C42"] [WhiteElo "2700"] [BlackElo "2751"] [PlyCount "62"] 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 d6 4. Nxf7 Kxf7 5. Nc3 c5 6. Bc4+ Be6 7. Bxe6+ Kxe6 8. d4 Kf7 9. dxc5 Nc6 10. Qe2 Qd7 11. Be3 dxc5 12. f4 Re8 13. e5 Ng4 14. Rd1 Qf5 15. O-O h5 16. Bc1 Nd4 17. Qc4+ Kg6 18. h3 Nh6 19. Nb5 a6 20. Nxd4 cxd4 21. Qxd4 Rc8 22. Qb6+ Kh7 23. Qxb7 Rxc2 24. Be3 Qg6 25. Rc1 Rxc1 26. Rxc1 Nf5 27. Bf2 h4 28. Rc7 Ng3 29. Kh2 Nf1+ 30. Kg1 Qb1 31. Bxh4 Bc5+ 1/2-1/2


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-05-08 23:03:28)
Herrstroem gambit, 1.Nf3 g5

What do you think about this gambit (new thematic tournament) ? .. Very critical. Is it lost for Black already ?


Nicola Lupinacci    (2007-05-09 10:04:10)
suggestion

What about Dory defense?
1. d4 Nf6, 2. c4 e6, 3. Nf3 Ne4

or (in italian language) Attacco Aculeo?
1. g4 d5, 2. Bg2 c6; 3 g5 (I don't know if Black can make the first move in thematic tournament)


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-05-09 14:16:55)
Re: suggestion

Strange openings :) .. Why should Black play first !?


Nicola Lupinacci    (2007-05-09 17:54:04)
Re: Re: Suggestion

Becuose same gambits or critical openings start whit a white move,
i.e. King gambit: 1.e4 e5 2.f4
and now black can play 2. ... exf4 or 2. ... d6 or 2. ... Nc6 ecc. ecc.
I think that in certain thematic tournament whit opening like this 1st move would be made by black...

but i don't know how thematic tournaments work... :)



Thibault de Vassal    (2007-05-12 23:16:53)
rake

Actually, ie. for a Gold blitz game (chess) the rake is 3 E-Points for White and 0 E-Points for Black !

There are 2 different rakes, a one-time rake on money entry fees (or money prizes) and another one, much lower, on E-Points entry fees : If you play only one game (a win) and ask for a money prize, the rake is the money prize one, 25 Euros (let's call it 'money prize rake') but the more games you play before asking money prizes, so applying the E-Points rake, the more the global rake will tend to the 'E-Points rake' which is much lower.

"Money prizes have to be compared to E-Points prizes that are much higher : A win in a Gold blitz game is worth 197 E-Points, meaning the more games you play before to ask for a money prize, the less charged games are. In example, if you buy 3 Gold tickets (3 x 100 Euros), you'll get 300 E-Points, then you play 30 Gold blitz chess games (15 as White and 15 as Black) : 29 draws and 2 wins with White. Finally you have 300 - (30 x 100) + (15 x 100) + (13 x 97) + (2 x 197) = 455 E-Points. At the end, if you ask for a money prize for the last game you won, you'll get a 150 Euros money prize and your E-Points account will be 455 - 197 = 258 E-Points"


Quite complicate to visualize but as FICGS is not a casino, there's a normal value added tax on money entry fees in Europe (that's why money prizes for gold tournaments can't exceed 150 euros). This way, I think the rule is quite interesting for players who play at least 10 games... Trying to write it in a clearer way.


Albert H. Alberts    (2007-05-13 09:45:39)
shesnikov

ALL: Here is a possible novelty in the Shesnikov:1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cd4 4.Nd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 6.Ndb5 d6 7.Bg5 a6 8.Na3 b5 9.Bf6 gf6 10.Nd5 f5 11.Bd3 Be6 12.0-0 Bd5 13.ed5 Ne7 and now tournament lines go say Re1 to respond e4 with Bf1 and win over Nc2/a4 in the endgame. TRY 14. c3 Bg7 15. g4!? e4 16.Bc2 b4 17.cb4!? Bb2 18. Kh1 and now I was able to win for white after both Ba1 or Ba3 having gf5/Be4 or Ba4 and an open g-( and c and b)-file for white.Suppose g4 is healthy no black tournament player will engage in Shesnikov for a while? www.howtofoolfritz.com updated late april. Albert H.Alberts


Ilmars Cirulis    (2007-05-13 12:44:12)
Finally!

Hi, Thibault!
Congratulations! ;)

I am interested in money thematic games. :)
I can play in evenings at 6 on clock (server time).

- Traxler counterattack with white (Nxf7 and Bxf7)
- Evans gambit with black
- Latvian gambit with white (I like Svedenborg very much :) )

I offer 30 EUR money stakes. If I win I get some money. If not, then money goes to my opponent.

Can I transfer 30 EUR to FICGS account in moneybookers.com?


Ilmars Cirulis    (2007-05-13 12:55:49)
Interesting

My try was 14.Nxb5. :) The game is still going.

I offer (after 14.g4) 14.-- fxg4 15.Qxg4 0-0 with f5 and e4. Now black (not white) has open g-line. Also black has control in center. But white has only weak horse and bishop (against active black horse and bishop).
In my opinion.



Garvin Gray    (2007-05-14 15:25:46)
suggestion


I have had an opponent say to me that if you want to be a certain colour against another opponent who is already in the waiting list for a tournament, then you have to join the tournament in a specific position.

If this is the case, perhaps having drr's will speed up the nomination process because some players will not be picking and choosing which colour to they want against a certain opponent.

They will just enter because they will be both white and black :P



Ilmars Cirulis    (2007-05-17 22:52:42)
Challenge!

Who want to defend
- Evans gambit with white
- Traxler counterattack with black?

I will be happy to play Silver Ligting game and try to kill that UCOs.

Wait and I will add more openings to that list. :)



Albert H. Alberts    (2007-05-19 15:54:40)
shesnikov

Cirulis/Thibault. Indeed after 14.-fg4 15.Qg4 f5 black is clearly better. But my Fritz-10 went 14.- e4/Bb2 and that is bad. However white can go 12.c3 Bd5 13/ed5 Ne7 14. g4!? hg4 15.Qg4 Rg8 16.Qf3 Ng6 and then 17.0-0-0 to save tempi for 0-0/Kh1 and connect rooks.I'll be back early next week for lines.


Mikhail Ruzin    (2007-05-30 13:08:42)
White win the game

Hi Phil. And what is question about game 9752? White win the game. Its clear. There are not any groups with unknown (questionable) status. Use MultiGo (for example) to count result of game. (M19 stil not defended) "Chinese Rule: White: 191.25 = 186 (Points) + 3 (Shared) / 2 + 7.5 (Komi) / 2 Black: 169.75 = 172 (Points) + 3 (Shared) / 2 - 7.5 (Komi) / 2 W + 10.75 Japanese Rule: White: 119.5 = 100 (Territory) + 12 (Black's Dead) + 7.5 (Komi) Black: 98 = 98 (Territory) + 0 (White's Dead) W + 21.5"


Graham Cridland    (2007-06-11 18:03:56)
Pirc in Correspondence

Sounds like a good book. Still, I won't buy it, for the simple reason that the Pirc isn't much fun for Black. There are several simple ways for White to get a comfortable advantage, even without a lot of theory. In Correspondence I'd think the problem was worse, since it's harder to arrange tactical accidents for your opponent (sort of the point of the Pirc). I guess the point is that the Pirc isn't supertheory, so you can get dynamic positions without playing the Sicilian. But I'd rather (especially in correspondence) have an extra central pawn than a less explored position, wouldn't you?


Don Groves    (2007-06-12 09:22:59)
Nigel Davies on the Pirc

Interesting that he would write about the Pirc since I thought he said something in his mailing list a few months ago about giving up on the Modern (a variant of the Pirc) for black which he had played for some time.


Graham Cridland    (2007-06-15 17:29:55)
Game 11393

Just finished an interesting game in the Scandinavian. Pretty level most of the way, although both sides must have missed some chances. A couple of questions: First, in the final position, what is the evaluation of the endgame after 31 ... Qc8 32 Qe5+ Qc7 33 Qxg7 Rxg7 34 Re8+ Qc8 35 Rxc8 Kxc8 36 Rxg7 (thus far all forced) 36...Rxd4 37 Rh7 Rf4 38 Rxh6 Rxf2 39 Rg6 Rh2 40 h6 (this exact endgame can be reached by other move orders in Cridland-Khayman)? I looked at the ending for a long time, as it seemed to be my only option other than forcing a draw (32 Qe3 Re4 33 Qd2 isn't attractive). But I think it's drawn! White's only plan is bringing the king to g1 to release the back rank, but that gives black time to rush forward with pawns and king on the Queenside. White can get to h7 by Rg8+ Kc7, Rg7+ Kb6, h7 at some point, but then what? It looked so attractive at first.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-06-16 22:00:18)
FICGS vs. IGAME.RU

Hello to all.

I'm glad to announce a new match between chess servers, that should start in about 10 days to 2 weeks. The previous match was FICGS vs. GAMEKNOT (we lost :))

The opponent is the russian server - http://www.igame.ru , an opportunity to meet new chessfriends from eastern countries :)

Here is the agreement :


1. Teams should consist of 25 players maximum (an exact number should be agreed later);
2. Number of games on each board equals 2 (one for White and one for Black);
3. Time control is 30 days + 3 days/move;
4. Leaves are provided, 30 days/year;
5. The match is played on www.ficgs.com;
6. Start date of the match should be agreed by both sides after squads are completed;
7. ICCF rules of play are applied.


In this match chess engines are allowed, it goes without saying we need a strong correspondence chess team, but anyone who wish to play may email me (or use the 'message to webmaster' form in "My account"), or just respond to this post.

Best wishes.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-06-18 05:41:30)
New update !

"Tournaments" page and waiting lists have been completely re-organized by time control ! (more coherent and clear IMO)


Also a new rating list : Active players list.

- Active players list displays players who connected during the last 2 months... Right now almost 700 of 2100 which is quite good IMO :)

- Preliminary rating list now displays players who finished at least 1 rated game, less than 9 rated games and who connected during the last 2 years. (which is much more interesting)


At last, the rating rules for advanced chess (blitz & lightning) have been improved. Now a fair performance bonus for Black, see rules :

http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html#rating_advanced_chess


And now, I'm going to sleep... Good night everyone :)


Ilmars Cirulis    (2007-06-23 06:02:44)
Black 20th move...

20.-- Re8 is losing. Search for games and you will see. But 20.-- Rd8 is drawish, IMO. And I don't understand why I don't play it?


Ilmars Cirulis    (2007-06-23 06:51:09)
Human games..

[Event "Bundesliga 2006-7"][Site "Berlin GER"][Date "2007.??.??"] [White "Luther,T"][Black "Ftacnik,L"][Round "9"]
20.-- Nc6 21.Bxf8 Kxf8 22.O-O Qb6 23.Rxf7+ Kg8 24.Rxg7+ 1-0

[Event "II Rapid"][Site "Canada de Calatrava ESP"][Date "2007.??.??"][White "Shirov,A"] [Black "Guliyev,N"][Round "4"]
20.-- Bd6 Nc6 21.O-O f5 22.Bxf8 Nxf8 23.Nd6 b5 24.Bf3 Bd7 25.Nxf5 exf5 26.Rxd7 Nxd7 27.Bxc6 Rd8 28.Bxd7 1-0

[Event "Corus A"][Site "Wijk aan Zee NED"][Date "2007.??.??"][White "Anand,V"][Black "Van Wely,L"][Round "9"]
20.Bd6 Nc6 21.Bxf8 Nxf8 22.O-O Bd7 23.Nd6 Ne5 24.Nxb7 Qc7 25.Nd6 f6 26.c4 Bc6 27.Ra1 Nfd7 28.Qd4 a5 29.Nb5 Qb6 30.Qxb6 Nxb6 31.Rd6 Nbd7 32.Nd4 Be4 33.Nxe6 a4 34.Nc7 Ra5 35.Ra6 Rxa6 36.Nxa6 Bc6 37.c5 Bb7 38.Rc1 Nc6 39.Nc7 Nd4 40.Bc4+ Kf8 41.Rd1 1-0

[Event "Corus A"][Site "Wijk aan Zee NED"][Date "2007.??.??"][White "Motylev,A"][Black "Anand,V"][Round "2"]
20.Bd6 Rd8 21.Qg3 Qf5 22.Be5 Qg6 23.Qh4 Nc6 24.O-O f5 25.Bh5 Qh7 26.Bb2 fxe4 27.Rf7 Rf8 28.Qf2 Rxf7 29.Qxf7+ Kh8 30.Rf2 e5 31.Qd5 Nf6 0-1

[Event "ch-USA"][Site "Stillwater USA"][Date "2007.??.??"][White "Shabalov,A"] [Black "Ehlvest,J"][Round "7"]
20.Bd6 Re8 21.O-O f5 22.Qg3 Nc6 23.Qg6 Qd8 24.c4 Ne7 25.Qg3 fxe4 26.Bc7 Nf5 27.Rxf5 Qe7 28.Bd6 Qd8 29.Bc7 Qe7 30.Bd6 1/2-1/2

[Event "Bundesliga 2006-7"][Site "Baden Baden GER"][Date "2007.??.??"][White "Shirov,A"][Black "Ftacnik,L"][Round "15"]
20.-- Re8 21.O-O f5 22.Qg3 Nc6 23.Qg6 Qd8 24.Bc4 Kh8 25.Ng5 Qxg5 26.Qxe8+ Kh7 27.Qxe6 Nf6 28.Qe2 Ne4 29.Rd3 Qg6 30.Ba3 Ne5 31.Rd4 Qb6 32.Rfd1 Nc6 33.Qe3 Nxd4 34.Qxd4 Qxd4+ 35.Rxd4 b5 36.Bd3 Ra7 37.Rd8 Be6 38.Re8 Bc4 39.Bxe4 fxe4 40.Rxe4 Rd7 41.Bb4 Kg6 42.Re7 Rd1+ 43.Re1 Rxe1+ 44.Bxe1 Kf5 45.Ba5 h5 46.g3 Ke4 47.Kf2 g5 48.c3 g4 49.Bb4 Kd3 50.Ba5 Bf7 51.Bb4 Bg6 52.Ba5 Kc4 53.Ke3 Kb3 54.Kd2 Ka4 55.Bc7 a5 56.Bd8 b4 57.cxb4 axb4 58.Bf6 Kb3 59.Bg7 Kc4 1/2-1/2


Michael Aigner    (2007-06-23 12:55:32)
Rybka 2.3.2a would!

Hi! Rybka follws the mentioned game Motley -Anand but finds an improvement at move 24. 24. Bh5 Qf5 26. Bxg7 with an unclear (IMO, according to Rybka equal position. it could follow Nc5 (Kxg7 26.Rf1) 26. Rxd8+ Kxd8 27.Kd6 Kd3+ 28.cxd Qa5+ 29.Ke2 Kxg7 still unclear, but in an otb game i would shourly prefer to play white. I can imagine when you look deeper in the position after Bh5 you might find a win for white - or lets say a variation in which it is almost not possible for black to defend in an otb game even when the objective evaluation says the position is equal. This could be the reason why Re8 is prefered by strong human GMs.


Nick Burrows    (2007-07-16 14:14:00)
Sandipan v Tiviakov

[Event "Canadian Open"] [Site "Ottawa CAN"] [Date "2007.07.14"] [Round "9"] [White "Sandipan,C"] [Black "Tiviakov,S"] [Result "1-0"] [WhiteElo "2563"] [BlackElo "2648"] [EventDate "2007.07.07"] [ECO "E17"] 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 b6 4. g3 Bb7 5. Bg2 Be7 6. O-O O-O 7. d5 exd5 8. Nh4 c6 9. cxd5 Nxd5 10. Nf5 Nc7 11. e4 d5 12. Nc3 Bf6 13. exd5 cxd5 14. Bf4 Nba6 15. Re1 Qd7 16. Bh3 Ne6 17. Ne4 Bxb2 18. Rb1 Bc8 19. Ng5 Bf6 20. Qh5 Bxg5 21. Bxg5 Re8 22. Bf6 gxf6 23. Qh6 Nac5 24. Rbd1 Qb7 25. Rd4 Ne4 26. Rexe4 dxe4 27. Qxf6 Qc7 28. Nh6+ Kf8 29. Qh8+ Ke7 30. Nf5+ 1-0


Francois Caire    (2007-07-18 07:15:01)
Voilà

[Event "WCCC 21th Final"] [Site "Stockholm"] [Date "2005.08.01"] [EventDate "?"] [Round "10"] [Result "1-0"] [White "Arno Nickel"] [Black "Joop Van Oosterom"] [ECO "B47"] [WhiteElo "2590"] [BlackElo "2777"] [PlyCount "89"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nc6 5. Nc3 Qc7 6. Ndb5 Qb8 7. Be3 a6 8. Bb6 axb5 9. Nxb5 Bb4+ 10. c3 Ba5 11. Nc7+ Qxc7 12. Bxc7 Bxc7 13. Qg4 g6 14. Qh4 Nge7 15. Bb5 f5 16. f3 O-O 17. O-O d5 18. Kh1 Bd7 19. a4 Rf7 20. Qe1 Kg7 21. Rd1 Raf8 22. Qe2 Bc8 23. Bxc6 bxc6 24. b4 e5 25. a5 Rf6 26. h3 h5 27. Ra1 Bb7 28. a6 Ba8 29. c4 d4 30. c5 g5 31. g3 Ng6 32. Rg1 Kh6 33. Raf1 h4 34. f4 exf4 35. e5 d3 36. Qg2 hxg3 37. exf6 Nh4 38. Qd2 f3 39. Rxf3 Nxf3 40. Qxd3 Nxg1 41. Qd7 Rxf6 42. Kxg1 Be5 43. Qe8 Bc3 44. Qxa8 Bxb4 45. Qh8+ 1-0

I got this from www.chessgames.com


Nick Burrows    (2007-07-27 21:47:18)
Nice game from Tiviakov.

[Event "8th It"]
[Site "Montreal CAN"]
[Date "2007.07.26"]
[Round "7"]
[White "Tiviakov,S"]
[Black "Miton,K"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteElo "2648"]
[BlackElo "2648"]
[EventDate "2007.07.19"]
[ECO "C87"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 d6 5. O-O Bd7 6. c3 Nf6 7. Re1 Be7 8. d4 O-O 9. d5 Nb8 10. Bc2 c6 11. Nxe5 dxe5 12. d6 Bg4 13. dxe7 Qxe7 14. Qd3 Nbd7 15. Nd2 Rfd8 16. Nf1 Be6 17. Ng3 Nf8 18. Qf3 Ne8 19. Be3 Qc7 20. Nf5 f6 21. h4 Nd6 22. b3 Kh8 23. c4 c5 24. Rad1 Bg8 25. h5 Ne6 26. h6 Nxf5 27. exf5 Nd4 28. Qe4 Rd6 29. Bb1 Ne2+ 30. Rxe2 Rxd1+ 31. Kh2 Rad8 32. Bc2 R1d7 33. Qh4 Qd6 34. Be4 b6 35. hxg7+ Rxg7 36. Bh6 Rgd7 37. Re3 b5 38. cxb5 axb5 39. Rg3 b4 40. Rg4 Rc7 41. f4 Re7 42. Rg3 Red7 43. Qg4 Qe7 44. fxe5 fxe5 45. Bc6 Qf6 46. Bg5 Qxc6 47. Bxd8 Qh6+ 48. Rh3 Qd6 49. Bg5 Rf7 50. Rh6 Qf8 51. Qh4 Kg7 52. Rg6+ 1-0


Tano-Urayoan Russi Roman    (2007-08-05 07:38:46)
Translation (most accurate i could do)

"The ending is clearly drawn. There is no way to force in as the white king is badly placed and could not escape the black queen's checks. Luzuriaga's analysis starts with 48. Qe5+ so we assumed that would had been the move he played if the game had continued. If black's reply 48. Kg8, a bad move (Luzuriaga's analysis) that will result in a lost position for black. De Silva analyses that 48. Kh7 will result in a drawn endgame. I have checked all the variations in the computer and the result is the same for all of them DRAW."


Sheng Wu    (2007-08-07 19:58:56)
Go game 10878 Why black resign?

Why black resign? Black has huge advantage, four corners, one group of stones in center can escape.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-08-10 19:12:21)
Clock ?

I didn't look at the position, but it is also possible that Black lost on time...


Ilmars Cirulis    (2007-08-12 10:34:25)
I agree!

Who will be white, who black? :)


Garvin Gray    (2007-08-12 15:35:05)
me black.

I remember us previously playing a game where I was white. So you can be white this time.


Thomas Tamayo    (2007-08-15 14:40:37)
White is far ahead

Corners are important, but a quick count shows white with at least 90 + komi, black with around 65. Since B has to escape around e6 B can't hope to get much more while W will continue to earn points. Game 13059, though, is a mis-resignation. I set it up as a problem at http://www.godiscussions.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3856


Thomas Tamayo    (2007-08-15 14:47:04)
SGF Result field

Would it be possible to update the SGF Result field for a completed game? For example: Black wins on time: B+T Black wins on score/resign: B+ (since no scoring is done on the server). It might clear up problems like the thread post "Go game 10878 Why black resign?" (it is unclear if it was time or resign).


Graham Wyborn    (2007-08-26 09:44:13)
New Icon?

I notice that the "FICGS" icon has changed from a black crown to a red letter "T" underscored with a broad blue line. What does this new icon stand stand for and mean?


Graham Wyborn    (2007-08-27 10:48:04)
New icon mystery!

In IE7 it has now returned to the original black crown.

But in my shortcuts on the taskbar it is still as previously described. Maybe my system has picked up an icon from somewhere! Not sure how!

Any help or advice!


Rodolfo d Ettorre    (2007-08-28 07:23:19)
Re

I tried with IE and Opera and I only got the black crown ...


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-09-06 21:00:47)
Rugby World Cup 2007

The Rugby World Cup 2007 starts these days in France... Who will be able to win this great tournament according to you ? .. All Blacks of New-Zealand, England, France, Australia... ?

France has a good chance IMO :)


Jason Repa    (2007-09-06 22:30:19)
Canada

We can't leave Canada out of this thread. After all, we're home to the guy (the late Abe Yanofsky) who was Canadian champion many times, and who gave Fischer the longest game of his career. Fischer had the black end of a Najdorf and finally ground poor Abe down to get the full point in the 112 move marathon. It was RNPP vs RBP way back at move 55
Yanofsky was able to hold Fischer to a draw with the black end of a Caro Kann in their next (and final) encounter six years later. Even getting so much as a draw against the great RJF, especially with the black pieces, is quite the accomplishment. Just ask GM Bisguier, who lost 13 straight games to him.

Getting back to the present, the current Canadian champion is the young Nikolay Noritsyn.


Mark Noble    (2007-09-11 08:02:09)
France are a JOKE

Well as to France losing opening game that would have to be the easy cash I have won in a long time since they have only beaten Argentina once in the last 8 games . As to the winners All BLACK's all the way!


Andrew Stephenson    (2007-09-10 21:05:48)
chess engines

Following Thibault's comments about Rybka having changed correpondence chess I purchased the rybka engine. It is a very good program but I dont see how it has affected cc anymore than Fritz. I have used Fritz 8 and 9 extensively for analysis and have until now no experience of other engines. Although I have just downloaded Toga II which is an excellent engine (and free!!) if anyone wants a free engine this is a top program that downloads in seconds and is up there with the commercial programs. I noticed Rybka seems more conservative evaluating positions than Fritz. However it has blind spots. For an example taken from the current chess cafe "Yasser Annotates" (Ivanchuk Seirawan 1990)after 1 e4 c6 2 d4 d5 3 Nc3 dxe 4 Nxe Bc5 5 Ng3 Bg6 6 h5 h6 7 Nf3 Nd7 8 h5 Bh7 9 Bd3 Bxd 10 Qxd Ngf6 11 Bf4 e6 12 0-0-0 Be7 13 c4 b5 Black offers a pawn my reaction is not to take - otb I would never take. Why open the c file for black and grabbing the pawn by Qxb5 looks risky with only 2 pawns to cover the king and open b and c files. Fritz prefers 14 c5 with 14 cxd followed by 15 Kb1 as 2nd choice after 3 minutes ply 15 depth Rybka r chooses 14 cxb cxb then 15 Qxb5?! even after 1 hour at ply 19! In cc I would look at 14cxb and 15 Qxb5 to see if I could survive and win with the extra pawn but working with Fritz it takes but a few minutes to see black has compensation after 15 Qxb5 Nd5. When 16 Be5 gives an inferior endgame for white and 16 Bd2 Rb8 gives an attack for black. The top professionals work with a range of programs Fritz, Junior, Shredder, Hiracs and Rybka to generate ideas. Does anyone have any views on these other program's characteristics?


Andrew Stephenson    (2007-09-10 23:31:53)
chess engines

Hi Jason As Thibault post indicates Toga is a fruit flavour ie fruit variant. Check CEGT rating list for single version engines (http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/rating.htm) Toga II is at no3 and Fruit 2.3 is at no 5 position. As for our game no engine is ever going to save me! Maybe 28 ..Rc8 would have held but earlier on 14 exd6 Bf6 15 Bxf8 Kxf6 16 Qf3 looks really disgusting for black. I am not going to blame the opening but Fritz and I are back to the Najdorf! Apparently Aagard had a book out on offbeat sicilianl ines in which he could find no way for white to gain an advantage in this Prins line hmm Im sceptical. Thibault - thanks for expanding on your comments. I note your point about calm positions. The game I cited is the sort of wild position where Rybka is not so good later in the game it is convinced that 19 ..Nxf2 is good for black a move which loses and which fritz rejects fairly quickly.


Ilmars Cirulis    (2007-09-11 19:21:27)
I like to say it sometimes.

Use your black-and-white squared brains!


Andrew Stephenson    (2007-09-16 05:29:56)
Kramnik

I fancy Kramnik to win because his black game is a bit more solid and his white openings are more flexible than anand. Anands game 1 for example was a bit ropey. On the other hand he scored a cracker against Aronian as black.


Gino Figlio    (2007-09-17 06:32:59)
Schuster-Figlio

Hi Thibault, Thanks for clarifying the current situation, however it does not make it less true that I was in advantage at the start of the tournament. According to tournament rules I would have won with 8 draws.

Regarding wins with white, in a round robin you must try to win with white and draw with black. That's normal. In a match, only wins should be counted and not draws. Any other tournament rule intended to break a tie will fall short. A tie is a tie. You try to break it there will always be controversy one way or the other.

Have you considered a "blitz" match to break ties in future 8-game matches? 2-4 simultaneous games at 10/10 or 10/15 would be better than a coin toss...




Andrew Stephenson    (2007-09-20 13:58:05)
chessfriends

I remember that chessfriends.com used to have the opposite rule ie the player with the lower elo advanced in the knockout. I guess their reasoning was if your better rated you should be able to prove it. As Thibault mentioned he may be a victim of the FICGS rule in his match against Farit Balabaev. He has the higher TER and his opponent as taken 4 draws as white by repeating the same 15 move sequence in his 4 white games (1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 cxd 4 Nxd Nf6 5 Nc3 a6 6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 Qb6 8 Qd2 Qxb2 9 Rb1 Qa3 10 f5 Nc6 11 fxe6 fxe6 12 Nxc6 bxc6 13 Be2 Be7 14 0-0 0-0 15 Rb3 Qc5+ 1/2 1/2) Not the greatest advert for cc games! It requires cooperation for this to happen although its dangerous for black to deviate after 9 Rb1. Still there are perfectly viable alternatives IMO in the Najdorf against 6 Bg5 other than this line. I suggest going to a 2 game mini match play off series at 5 days reserve and 1 day per move increment until there is a win. This would provide incentive to go for a result for the higher rated player in the main match. I would retain the lower rated player wins rule for decisive games (but overall draw) for the main match but leave it equal for the playoffs.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-09-20 20:39:56)
chessfriend

As far as I can remember, this way to break the tie was used in most Chessfriend round-robin money tournaments. I have no doubt that some players would have sacrificed their ratings for more chances to win cash prizes... Highest rated players were attracted anyway because they were invited.

About my match, I was simply glad to get these 4 draws easily with the black pieces, it gave me more time to try to win with White (I was in time trouble at this moment). GM Farit Balabaev is a strong correspondence chess player, even if I lose the match, I have no regret about it. Surely I won't play my FICGS WCH games less seriously than my IECG WCH ones :) .. By the way I still hope to play the first candidates final against Gino or Peter :p


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-09-20 21:54:21)
WCH knockout vs. round-robin

I don't know about finished money tournaments at Chessfriend, this was just the available rules I read.

About FICGS & IECG WCH, the point is one don't play the same way a knockout or a round-robin tournament, this is not a question to play seriously or not. In every FIDE WCH (knockout) final match, Kramnik and maybe even Kasparov would accept an easy draw with Black, simply because they have to save energy, as chances of win are generally defended with White (actually Kasparov even offered a short draw with White against Kramnik's Berlin defence). In IECG or ICCF WCH round-robin tournaments, draws are to be avoided at any price but many strong players think the same way: White must win, Black must draw. That's very different in matches, so the strategy. I did not play drawish openings in IECG WCH, and I'll accept short draws if I can't expect more, but it doesn't mean I take it more seriously. According to the situation, these 4 draws were quite a good choice for both Farit & me... in a way :)


Andrew Stephenson    (2007-09-20 23:11:48)
chessfriend

Yes tournaments are different from matches but to take 50% of the match games as identical 15 move draws seems extreme and without parallel. Again it can only have been good for Farit to give up all his white games because his higher TER means he can get through by drawing his 4 black games so its really a 4 game match where black wins if he draws the 4 games. Anyway I just think it devalues the event to do that and the tie break rules encourage it - but lets agree to differ!


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-10-04 16:17:18)
3,5-2,5

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=13157

A win from Peter... In the round-robin cycle final tournament, Gaetano Laghetti won his game with Black against Michael Aigner !


Andrew Stephenson    (2007-10-04 20:45:13)
Schuster win

Witty ending to the Schuster Figlio game. I always feel very uncomfortable as black in this line if e5 or c5 cannot be played. So 15 ..c5!? might do the trick eg 16 cxd5 exd5 17 dxc5 Bxc5 18 Nxd5 Nxd5 19 Rxd5 Bxe3 and it looks like black can hold this. It also gives some point to 6..Be4 inducing f3 and creating a weakness on e3 - although I have never understood why black wants to make white play f3 anyway!


Sergey Pligin    (2007-10-15 12:27:24)
match

My opponent Peter Schuster has made a blunder in a game he plays for White, playing with the other knight. Having made this mistake he resigned in both games. I should note the result in the second game is unclear now. Taking into consideration the match is friendly, understanding my opponent's mistake I ask Thibault permission to cancel results of my finished games and recover a position in the Schuster-Pligin game after 23rd Black's move, i.e. one full move back.
I hope the players of the iGame team will understand me and accept my decision.
It's important for me to continue playing the both games, especially the one I am playing for White.
Best regards, Sergey


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-10-21 22:35:06)
Eros Riccio wins 1st FICGS freestyle !

SIM Eros Riccio completely stunned the tournament, very well prepared with White & Black on this interesting sicilian line : 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Qb6 8.Qd2 Qxb2 9.Rb1 Qa3 10.e5

Final score for Eros : 5 / 6 .. Congratulations :)

See results and games :

http://www.ficgs.com/tournament_FICGS__CHESS__FREESTYLE_CUP__000001.html


Mikhail Ruzin    (2007-11-08 10:54:22)
Go game 9307 score

Yes, according to FICGS rules (chinese counting, Komi 7.5), the score in game 9307 after removing groups m17, h3 is W+0.5 Black pass is fatal mistake. The second question is too hard 8)


Graham McGrew    (2007-11-23 21:03:15)
Wilkes-Barre/Traxler, anyone?

I prefer black but I will take what I can get. 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 Bc5


Rodolfo d Ettorre    (2007-11-24 12:07:32)
:P

I have an idea, can Mr. Cirulis play only with black?


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-11-24 16:13:26)
:P

Ilmars tries to prove that Traxler counter-attack is dead for Black... Anyway the only to play White only is thematic silver games :)

Graham, did you have a look at Ilmars analysis in Wikichess ? See http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=wikichess&article=611

You can analyze some lines with other players...


Graham McGrew    (2007-11-26 22:33:50)
Wilkes-Barre Furor

Thanks for this wealth of responses, all. Thanks too for the tip on Ilmars' analysis. I will check it out. Thibault, what is the next thematic tournament for which you need five more players? Ilmars, I would love to play a game with you as white, me as black. Being new to FICGS, I'm not exactly sure how to start a game with you . . . ?


Pekka I. Turakainen    (2007-11-27 22:44:48)
Can u figure this out?

Some time ago we played a game of chess with my friend and after 66. move reached the following position: 6k1/5b2/8/4q3/1K6/8/1RR5/8 w - - 0 1 We agreed that it's a draw. No it isn't! It's white's move and the material looks balanced, but black will have his win after 53 moves (if white has an ideal defence). This is what the almighty Nalimov says. Don't bother to check this out with your multiprocessor chess software...it'll probably take months before it finds the right combination. What to speak of the poor human brain. Feeling humble now....


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-12-01 15:02:34)
time counting

Hello Ulrich.

Yes, this is the only tournament where this problem happened, simply because the thematic opening starts at Black move number 10 :/ .. So the program added time to player Black when playing his first move, not to player White (at move eleven). I did not think about that when the tournament started, but anyway this advantage or disadvantage is shared (3 games with, 3 games without). Sorry about that.


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-12-19 18:08:38)
High level performance

Right, many congratulations to Marius, at least for beating Marc (who made a good tournament too) with the Black pieces !

And congrats to Dinesh for "submitting" new great quotes with an interesting Nietszche-like written style to FICGS files :)) (if you agree, of course)


Thibault de Vassal    (2007-12-29 23:27:34)
Major update : challenges

Hello to all.

Now it is possible to challenge connected players for bullet / lightning / blitz games (advanced chess tournaments - note : please verify time controls, ie. blitz games are played in 2 hours + 2 hours / 40 moves) with White or Black.

Many improvements to come (when I find some time), to display ratings and so on... All feedback welcome.


Marc Lacrosse    (2008-05-01 18:03:17)
to Andrew

"I don't se much benefit to letting the computer think for hours frankly wants it gets to 20 + ply. There all sorts of horizons in positions that letting the computer run for a year wont sort out."

There are other ways to use engines than letting simply one of them run for hours.
You may interactively walk along the various branches of the tree going from current position with one or several engines running.
You may also have engines playing some kind of test matches against each other from the current position or from any critical position that you identify along the possible continuations.
You can use Rybka randomizer against itself or against other engines for more exhaustive evaluation through test games
And so on ...

"Marc why are you playing this c3 stuff against the sicilian with such great kit? You play the same openings all the time and I thought it was because you had not much time!!!"

1. I never played this disreputed c3 stuff against the 2..d6 sicilian (with or without the 4.Be2 pawn offer) before january 2008 in my 140+ former serious correspondence games
Indeed I did choose it because I erroneously enrolled in three new tournaments simultaneously and I feared to miss time for serious analysis due to heavy workload at that time.
Results are a bit disappointing with it : five draws so far and two unfinished games that I should win (one win is sure and the other one is probable).
This should lead to a 64% result and a 2333 elo performance. Not shining but not that bad insn't it ?

2. I like playing unorthodox openings in correspondence play.
I do not see any interest in beginning my games with 30 moves of overanalysed theory.
Most often I decide for a side variation and I do play it in as many games as possible simultaneously : I do the analysis job once for all while being fully "in the mood" of a similar set of positions.
Then I change for something else
I won't probably ever play any more game with the line I played against you.

3. An exception is the Basman-Sale Sicilian (2..e6 4..Bc5).
I like it a lot and even have a web site devoted to it (http://chessbazaar.mlweb.info/basmansale/index.html)
I am in a running series of more than twenty corr. games without a single loss with it and decided not to stop using it until defeat happens
I probably analysed it more than anybody : I have several thousands of analysed lines in my files.
I am just busy to consider switching to something more agressive for cases where I need to play for a win as Black.

Regards

Marc


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-05-01 19:50:21)
Marc

Thanks for the informative reply! I do the interactive walk thing you mentioned its very useful though you need reasonable power to have several engines running at once - this you have! I am afraid I dont know how to organise test matches but sounds good. same with Rybka randomiser I have the engine but no idea how to use the randomiser and get it to play itself. 2 wins from the c3 is good as I think it gives white nothing ..but in the line I chose I noticed that after Gelfand (as black) got a draw against Adams with this line Adams repeated it aginst Kasparov who varied. So I guess Adams had an improvement perhap it was what you played? - as black has to find some very accurate moves . Incidentally I very nearly played 5..g5!!? which is really interesting but as my other games were promising decided to settle for taking a draw I like the Basman-Sale and although I have given up e4 in cc will play e4 if we play again as I have some ideas against it. Thanks for the reply


Jason Repa    (2008-05-02 22:36:29)
Lasker Variation of the From's Gambit

My game against Marc-Eric Plante is finally over after more than a year. I've been dabbling with the idea that this line of the From's gambit may be losing by force. If someone can find an improvement for Black with some supporting analysis, I'd love to see it. http://chessmusings.blogspot.com/2008/05/from-night.html


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-05-03 09:28:38)
From??

Completely lost for black imo its madness to throw away a pawn like this at cc - I suppose there might be some way to grovel for a draw after 4..Nf6 black will probably get his pawn back unless white plays e3 and d4 when he has the hole on e4 has a kind of compensation. After 4..g5 can put up more of a fight with 5...Nc6 at least white doesnt get quite such a massive a massive centre All black has are some tactical tricks and a temporary lead in development once white avoids these and gets his pieces out of the box its dire for black. The last GM to play this as black (Kotronias) got a completely lost position although he won the game! On the other hand 1 f4 at cc seems a waste of white .... if everyone would reply with the From I would play nothing else but f4!!!


Jason Repa    (2008-05-04 07:45:33)
From??

I agree with most of what you said, but I'm not sure I'd go so far as to conclude that all variations of the From's Gambit are busted. We might end up finding out that some variations of it are fine for Black.

I also disagree with your statement that "1 f4 at cc seems a waste of white". Assuming I'm willing to hypothetically go along with the argument that there's supposedly something "wrong" with 1.f4, even though it's at worst a Dutch Defense a move up......you're not taking into consideration the fact that some people actually do more than "play" correspondence chess and want to practice lines they play in live tournaments. 1.f4 has been played by many of the world's greatest players, and in serious competitive tournaments. Fischer, Kasparov, Lasker, and many others have played 1.f4 occasionally, and there are many current IM's and even a GM (Henrik Danielsen) who have played it quite frequently.

Perhaps your idea of "playing chess" is to simply plug a position into various chess engines and mindlessly relay the moves your program suggests, but as for myself, I use the data I acquire from my cc games to prepare for my real chess (chess between human mind vs human mind). Anything other than that is just analysis or group study at best.


Jason Repa    (2008-05-04 08:17:16)
From??

FYI,

5...Nc6 doesn't "put up more of a fight". It loses immediately to 6.Bxg5. I rarely have anyone play that badly against me in an online bullet game, let alone a cc game.

and in the line with 4...Nf6 (called the Mestel Variation), there is no clear way for Black to win his pawn back.


Jason Repa    (2008-05-04 11:54:53)
Lasker Variation of the From's Gambit

One correction. My comment about 5...Nc6?? 6.Bxg5 was from the line:

1.f4 e5 2.fxe5 d6 3.exd6 Bxd6 4.Nf3 g5 5.d4

But I still don't believe that 5...Nc6 holds any more promise than 5...g4, even from: 1.f4 e5 2.fxe5 d6 3.exd6 Bxd6 4.Nf3 g5 5.g3. The reason 4...g5 is played is to play to "g4" and dislodge the knight on f3. I don't believe delaying "g4" is going to benefit Black, as was evidenced in:

Malaniuk,Vladimir P (2600) - Tseshkovsky,Vitaly (2510) [A02] RUS-Cup Krasnodar (3), 1998 1.f4 e5 2.fxe5 d6 3.exd6 Bxd6 4.Nf3 g5 5.g3 Nc6 6.c3 g4 7.Nh4 f5 8.d4 f4 9.Qd3 Nf6 10.Bxf4 Bxf4 11.gxf4 0-0 12.Nd2 Be6 13.0-0-0 Bxa2 14.h3 Nd5 15.Ng2 Qe7 16.hxg4 Rad8 17.e3 Rd6 18.Rh5 Ncb4 19.Qe4 Qd7 20.Bb5 c6 21.Bc4 Bxc4 22.Nxc4 Nf6 23.Rg5+ Kh8 24.Qf5 Nbd5 25.Nxd6 Qxd6 26.Rh1 c5 27.Nh4 1-0


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-05-05 12:50:53)
From here to eternity

Yes there might be some variations that are survivable especially OTB but at cc its tough to give up a pawn so early on. I think f4 is a perfectly ok first move (like b4) I just think it does not give any prospect of an opening advantage at cc because there is no surprise value and the black player has the time to research and find a response that equalises fairly quickly. That is why very few GM's have F4 as a main white weapon - it does not give enough prospects for an advantage - at the highest levels. Please note that qualification. I quite agree real chess is between people in real time and cc is a form of research competition. Getting experience for real world chess is a great reason to play a line at cc. There are exceptions OTB I often play the exchange french and have had good success (played by Kasparov Tal Morphy and others) I would not play it at cc though! In fact OTB I always play e4 but at cc gave it up because I see no way to get any adavantage against the caro kahn. Just relaying the moves the computer suggests does not, I think, give much chance of success against good players at cc. As for the From I do not believe in g5 white has to avoid the tricks and develop and is a pawn up. Not so easy otb!! - but at cc not so much of a problem. As for Nc6 yes I was talking about this move after 5 g3 and you are probably right I will try to look at the game you gave and do some analysis. As for the Mestel variation I thought black would get the pawn back unless e3 and d4 are played but again that was based on a quick look. Anyway perhaps the thematic tournament wil provide some answers.


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-05-06 12:10:33)
Strictly for the birds

Thanks for the link for the games they are nice. Obviously playing the From or the approach adopted by black in these games is not an accurate response! Better to play like Of course 1f4 does not lose or lead to a worse gane for white - it just allows black to get equality very quickly and easily. The "waste" is that white has the first move and a lead in development and chances for an advantage. 1 f4 doesnt develop any piece (except the king!) and is a bit committal and slightly weakening of the king side. I would like to show with analysis exactly what I mean. Black has many good systems here is one. 1 f4 d5 2 Nf3 g6 3 g3 (e3 is the other way to play more on that) Bg7 4 Bg2 Nf6 already black is equal IMO. GM Jakubiec (2524) played this position 3 times last year as white against Rozentalis (2581), Bartel(2608) and Kadziolka (2295) and won all 3 games! He would 0-0 play Q-h4 and g4 f5 and roll them over! In every game black got an advantage in the opening and lost but at cc thats not going to happen. In each game it was easy to see blacks mistakes and to see the right move to maintain an advantage for black. The other set up for white is to play 3 e3 (instead of g3)Bg7 4 Be2 (4 c4 is interesting)Nf6 5 0-0 0-0 6 d3 and now after c5 its level but I would rather play black. Look what happened to Evgeny Alexseev as black - a very strong 2600+ GM at the time - he continued 6 ..b6 7 h3 c5 8 Qe1 Bb7 9 g4 and lost to IM Sengupta. These Dutch reversed attacks can be scary to face otb but they are harmless at cc. Conclusion: 1 f4 is a dangerous move otb especially where the opponent is not expecting it but against an accurate cc player it does not offer any hope of an opening advantage - its a waste if the goal is to get some opening advantage - its productive if the goal is to gain experience and insight into f4 for use in real chess.


Pablo Schmid    (2008-05-06 14:33:19)
Jason,

I would like to know how you refute the line which begin with 10..Bf5 instead of your opponent's move 10..Qe7. It usually continues with 10..Bf5 11.e4 Qe7 12.Bg2 0-0-0 and now what? And when you say that after 4..Nf6 you don't see how Black can get the pawn back, I want to say that chess is not all about material but activity. So it might be possible that with best play, even if Black can't get the pawn back, they could reach a dynamical equality.


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-05-06 15:01:06)
A bird in the hand

I think comparing f4 to b4 is quite reasonable - they are both off beat openings. On the question of chess knowledge I do not know how much he knows about b4? It can also be a dangerous practical weapon and can pose the black player more problems than f4. It is played by serious professional chess players in tournaments eg GM Christian Bauer (2626) has played it several times successfully this year and quite a few IM's regularly play it with success. Now to comparing rating sizes something I confess to not having done since I was in short trousers. My current rating is 2225 with a future rating of 2247 but with 2 rapid games in the pipe line this should be a future rating of 2300 + shortly lets see. Mr Repas rating is 2281 with a future rating at the moment of 2316. How significant is that? Well I had the opportunity to look at his games to see what his rating is made up of. 10 of his wins have come against the same opponent Sandor Porkolab and in 7 of these Mr Porkolab abandoned the games in level, drawn or in some cases better position for him. Given that in these "wins" he was often rated over 2100 or in one case over 2200 this has boosted Mr Repa's rating significantly. He has not so far had much success in WCC not having got past stage 2. As reference to my loss was made I can say that this was in a variation (the Prins of the sicilian) that I believe is unsound. Actually I overstepped the time limit while on vacation although I think the game could not be saved I learnt my lesson and do not play dodgy openings any more. I have never on the other hand been busted after 17 moves in a main line opening at cc as sadly Mr Repa found himslef against Bucsa Loan (Game 1249),then rated 1700. Then again I have stopped trusting the books and analyse for myself. Still less could I imagine being lost in a cc game after 16 moves in an exchange French (by tranposition) An instructive loss to Torsten Opas ( game 4388)- won with simple developing moves - worth playing over. Incidentally proves what I was saying about the exchange french it can be dangerous - although not of course, at cc. Finally there is Mr Repa's pet Bird shot down by Mr Kotlyansky in the approved way as follows 1 f4 d5 2 Nf3 g6 3 e3 g7 4 Be2 Nf6 5 0-0 0-0 6 d4 c5 7 dxc5 Qc7 and Black was fine winning in 72 moves. Never having lost with f4 did not include this because I suppose it was a bullet bronze game. I am afraid I am naive enough to think that people play chess on the server to win and increase their rating - clearly there are people who play to learn and strengthen their game and for whom results and rating are secondary. No doubt such people would not be interested in anything so vulgar as comparing ratings. Neverthe less its all just opinion and we are all free to express it within the rules of the server. So: f4 is a waste of time at cc little more than an invitation to draw and the From is unsound and almost like resigning.


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-05-06 18:04:40)
From RIP

"would like to know how you refute the line which begin with 10..Bf5 instead of your opponent's move 10..Qe7. It usually continues with 10..Bf5 11.e4 Qe7 12.Bg2 0-0-0 and now what?" The answer is 13 Be3 and after Be6 14 Bf2 f5 15 Nd2 GM Kotronius tried 15..Qf7 16 0-0-0 Bxa2 when 17 e5 looks winning. Instead 16..fxe4! 17 Bxe4 Bxa2 and maybe black can hold with Na5 to come. Obviously 14 e5 is critical after 14 ..Bxe5 15 Bxc6 Rxh2 16 Rxh2 Bxg3+ 17 Rf2 black gets 2 pawns for a piece and an exposed king but white still has some winning chances. That leaves 13 ..Bd7 but the bishop is more passive and will probably end up going to e6 after f5 etc White has 14 Bf2 or 14 Kd1! intending Kc2 and Nd2 both look good. The problem for black is that his long term comp is the h file pressure which doesnt balance whites extra centre pawn. IMO


Pablo Schmid    (2008-05-06 20:13:21)
To Andrew

I would play 13..Bd7 to leave the e-file open. If 14.Bf2 then I play 14..f5 and I see nothing wrong for Black for the moment. 14.Kd1, I didn't look at that move, it seems interesting but really, Iam not that afraid. RIP? Easy to say...


Jason Repa    (2008-05-06 21:54:09)
Bird Brain loses in 33 Moves!

"Obviously playing the From or the approach adopted by black in these games is not an accurate response!"

That's not obvious at all. What's obvious is that I beat you quite easily when you and I played cc so you're far from being any kind of authority whatsoever!

"1f4 does not lose or lead to a worse gane for white - it just allows black to get equality very quickly and easily"

I just finished trying to explain to you, in the way a young child should be able to understand, that there is more to think about in chess than trying to play what current theory considers to be the best try for an opening advantage. Yet here you are rambling on about the same nonsense you were in your previous posts. Was Fischer's 2.d3 against the French the objectively strongest move? Even against (and perhaps especially against) computers, it can sometimes be better to play sidelines or moves which may serve to confuse an opponent. Is the King's Indian Attack the best try for an opening advantage for White? Probably not. But it was used by Kasparov to defeat Deep Blue. If you still can't understand the concept I've been trying to teach you, after several posts, I don't know what more I can do for you. Just keep mindlessly playing what established theory tells you are the strongest lines,(without having even the incipience of an understanding as to why) and keep mindlessly trusting the evaluations your program gives you, and you'll keep getting CRUSHED by guys like me.

"1 f4 doesnt develop any piece (except the king!) and is a bit committal and slightly weakening of the king side."

After this statement, if I didn't know better, I would have thought you were someone who just learned how to set up the pieces. It might be one of the dumbest things I've ever heard anyone say. Does 1.e4 develop a piece? How about 1.d4? I suppose those moves are "a waste in cc" as well. We should all be playing 1.Nf3 and 1.Nc3 according to you, lol.

1.f4 grabs space. It stakes out influence both in the center and on the kingside. It effectively prevents 1...e5 (lest White goes into a dubious gambit system) as an alternative to other moves which achieve this. There are also other intangibles that are part of the picture, such as the psychological effect the move may have, the lack of preparation an opponent may have against it, etc. If you ever began to understand chess at a level beyond just plugging moves into a program, you might start to appreciate that allowing concessions (such as the slight weakening of the White kingside resulting from 1.f4) is all part of the game. Fischer's famous quote: "you gotta give squares to get squares" is a famous example. If allowing static liabilities were something to be avoided at all cost, you'd never see a Sicilian Scheveningen. It allows all sorts of weaknesses.

As for your so called "analysis". It's a complete joke! For starters, you're "analyzing" a game resulting from the Leningrad Variation of the Bird's Opening. I line I've never played in my life, let alone here on FICGS. Is this how you try to win an argument/debate? By misrepresenting the facts? An intelligent person who genuinely felt that their argument had a leg to stand on, would simply take one of the 4 games I provided to you and do some analysis from there. Showing where Black could have improved. Then finally, after trying to "score points" with examples of the Leningrad Variation of the Bird's Opening, which I have never played, you post a game where White played poorly and lost to a lower rated player. As if that's never happened before in chess, lol. You don't even know enough to post the date of the game. I couldn't find this game on any of my databases(totally over 4,000,000 games), so if you didn't just make it up out of thin air, perhaps you got more wrong, such as the actual moves that were played, in addition to incorrectly stating:

"Look what happened to Evgeny Alexseev as black - a very strong 2600+ GM at the time - he continued 6 ..b6 7 h3 c5 8 Qe1 Bb7 9 g4 and lost to IM Sengupta."

Is it Black that lost here or White?

I took a brief look at the game, and it's hardly representative of proper play by White. 7.h3 was dubious at best. I prefer 7.Ne5. White then misses another opportunity to play the knight to e5 after 7...c5. Then 9.g4? is a gross thematic mistake. The only thing this game proves is that you're completely incapable of discussing chess in an intelligent way. Real chess players look for games that illustrate the critical lines for both sides, and try to arrive at some actual insights.

There is a reason I crushed you when we played cc last year.


Jason Repa    (2008-05-06 22:07:42)
From's Gambit

"And when you say that after 4..Nf6 you don't see how Black can get the pawn back, I want to say that chess is not all about material but activity"

I realize that Pablo, probably a lot better than you do. I didn't state, nor imply that White was up an entire pawn or that Black didn't have some compensation (albeit probably not enough) for the pawn. If you re-read both my thread and the one I was responding to, you will see that we weren't discussing the amount of dynamic compensation that Black gets for sacrificing the pawn. We were discussing whether or not Black gets his pawn back. End of story.


Jason Repa    (2008-05-06 23:08:30)
Bird Brain loses in 33 Moves!

"I think comparing f4 to b4 is quite reasonable"

You would. But we all know what happened to you when you and I played chess. I beat you in 33 moves. And we can see how not only do you not provide a game that's at least somewhat representative of the critical lines of the opening, but you can't even figure out when the supposed game was played, or whether or not White or Black won, and you only post a tiny fraction of it to boot. So evidently, what YOU think is not exactly to be regarded in high esteem here. Most people wouldn't have required my explanation where I described quite clearly how there have been many books written about the Bird's Opening. It has it's own discrete chapter in MCO, and its played in serious games in professional chess still today. They would already understand on their own, or would at least be intelligent enough to look up the information without having to have their hand held and have it spoon fed to them. But even after all this, you STILL don't understand. And you mention Christian Bauer who only pissed around with 1.b4 when he was playing opponents 400 elo LOWER RATED! One of his fabulous wins this year, that you were alluding to, was against 1861 rated Jacques Decamps, lol. The rest of the time they were 2100-2300. Has he ever played 1.b4 against another GM? (never mind super GM, as 1.f4 has many times been played against)

An opening move like 1.b4 might be fairly compared to something such as 1.g4. You won't see any dedicated chapter in MCO to either of those openings, but they're at least interesting enough to warrant some discussion in the "misc flank openings" chapter. 1.f4 might better be compared to something like Larsen's 1.b3. A sound sideline.

You want to talk about ratings? I've had to build up my rating from starting at the default of 1700, by winning 117 games (one of them against you), because I wasn't aware when I opened the account that the admin would let you start with your established elo. It's not surprising I played Sandor Porkulab a lot of times, as we both were very active playing a lot of games. Unlike you who started with the advantage of an inflated rating, which was somewhat tempered after that beating I gave you last year.

Sometimes in correspondence chess people abandon games and don't log in again. This was the case with Sandor Porkulab, although I had already beaten him a few times in games that were played to completion, and he wasn't better in any of the games that were abandoned. You're lying through your teeth there, or perhaps you're just too incompetent and dishonest to assess the games objectively. Why would Porkulab have 7 games against me where he was "level or better" when I had already beaten the guy every time we played before that? Did you even look at those games? Or is this just your pathetic way of trying to "score points" by using lies and deception? Additionally, the way the elo system works is that even if you do get a few easy points from say a win from an abandoned game that perhaps might have ended in a draw, that gain is quickly diluted and your rating naturalized as you play more games, because you win less points when you win,(or draw a higher rated opponent) and lose more when you lose (or draw a lower rated opponent), than you would have if you didn't receive those points. I've played many games since then and my rating here is probably where it would have been If I had not played Porkulab at all. Or if not already will soon be. So this is a pretty weak argument from you. A better argument is the fact that I CRUSHED you in 33 moves when we played. Porkolab at least gave me a decent fight when I played him. That's more than I can say for you. I felt like all I had to do was outsmart a machine when you and I played. I didn't have to worry about any human judgment from a real chess player getting in the way of my victory!

As for me getting a lost position after 17 moves against someone? For starters, I've played about 190 games here. What have you played.....32? And I think that's a testament to the fact that, unlike you, I'm a REAL chess player, so my goal here isn't to simply try to win the most online CC games to try to give myself some artificial illusion of ability. I don't always play what I consider to be the objectively best moves because I like to experiment and LEARN SOMETHING from the time I spend here. But having said that, I STILL outperform you greatly, and crushed you when we played last year. I'm also higher rated with a higher future rating, even though you had the advantage of started with a boosted initial rating. So much for what you "think" you know about the strongest moves in cc, lol. And your future rating is only 2247, not 2300+. If you want to discuss what might happen after some of your current games are resolved, don't sell me short at 2316, which is already a given. Talk about the 2370+ I expect to have after some of MY current games are resolved. If you want to argue/debate with someone, learn to do it in an intelligent and fair way. So far all you've accomplished is to lose the paltry amount of credibility you once had.


Pablo Schmid    (2008-05-06 23:13:38)
Jason,

"I realize that Pablo, probably a lot better than you do" What? How do you know? You know nothing about me and you say that... "We were discussing whether or not Black gets his pawn back" Is that question more important than "Does Black have a sufficient compensation for the pawn"? "For example; 10...Bf5 11.e4 Qe7 12.Bg2 0-0-0 13.Be3!+/-" Easy response when I already said that I would play 13..Bd7 here and now what?


Pablo Schmid    (2008-05-07 00:34:11)
...

"Actually you're wrong once again Pablo. I know that you're only a 1912 rated player on this site" Yeah, on this site... I began here as a 1700 (the first rating here) and I lost many games on time or because I was very busy and in a hurry to play a move without checking seriously to not lose on time. And corr rating does not mean everything. I play OTB too. Do you? I would be happy to play with you, even if you seems a bit arrogant when I see the way you speak in general. And still, when I read that: "FYI, 5...Nc6 doesn't "put up more of a fight". It loses immediately to 6.Bxg5. I rarely have anyone play that badly against me in an online bullet game, let alone a cc game. and in the line with 4...Nf6 (called the Mestel Variation), there is no clear way for Black to win his pawn back. " There is not discussion about material, you seems to judge the position on the fact that Black could not regain the pawn, so they are worse...


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-05-07 05:15:58)
f4 or not f4

1.0 Pablo here is a link you should read: http://www.avlerchess.com/chess-analysis/A_BRAND_NEW_Chessbase_9_for_sale_on_eBay_92649.html 2.0 Mr Repa here is a comment about the Dutch defense: "Black's ...f5 stakes a serious claim to the e4 square and looks towards an attack on White's kingside in the middlegame. However, it weakens Black's own kingside somewhat, and does nothing to contribute to Black's development" My point exactly about 1 f4 3.0 Mr Repa's chess federation of canada rating is listed as 2010 with an active rating of 1737. If he reaches am expected rating here of, by his account, 2370+ then everyone will be impressed particularly as Mr Repa says "I think I'm a bit out gunned here.I'm running BATTLE CHESS on a Commodore 64. I believe its running at 1.023 MHz." 4.0 It might be battle chess that accounted for the following cc (!) game as black he played against Torsten Opas 1.e4 e6 2.Nc3 d5 3.d4 Nf6 4.exd5 exd5 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.Bb5 Be7 7.Ne5 Bd7 8.O-O O-O 9.Bg5 h6 10.Bh4 a6 11.Bxc6 Bxc6 12.Re1 Re8 13.Qf3 Qd6 14.Re3 Qb4 15.Rae1 Bd8 16.Qf5 Qxd4 (oops)17.Bxf6 Bxf6 and the game is already lost 5.0 Together with his loss with 1f4 that he forgot about here is another example of the correct treatment of f4 by black against Mr Repa 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 g6 4.b3 Bg7 5.Bb2 O-O 6.Be2 b6 7.O-O Bb7 8.d3 c5 9.Ne5 Nfd7 10.d4 e6 11.Nd2 Nc6 12.Nxc6 Bxc6 completely dead for white no prospects and duly drawn. Like I said 1 f4 is a waste at cc. I doubt we shall see Mr Repa use it again against a good opponent on this site. 6.0 All the games I referred to were white victories OTB with 1. f4 "Look what happened to Evgeny Alexseev as black - a very strong 2600+ GM at the time - he continued 6 ..b6 7 h3 c5 8 Qe1 Bb7 9 g4 and lost to IM Sengupta." Alexseev lost and the criticisms of IM Sengupta's moves by Mr Repa are quite funny - thats the whole point. At cc Sengupta's play would not be impressive but otb it was effective. Incidentally the game was played in 2004 in India 8.0 1 g4 is like 1 b4? Well that is clearly wrong. There have been no GM - GM encounters with 1 g4 there have been several with 1 b4 including Topalov v Malakhatsov. Over 50 IM's and a dozen GM's have played 1 b4 very few have ever played g4. 1 f4 has been championed by GM Jakubiec who is the only GM who has played it regularly. 9.0 "What is weird is that the conversation began with quite civil exchanges before tiny criticisms quickly escalated to nuclear mode despite my genuine and exhaustive efforts at diffusion and removal of misinterpretation" Can anyone guess who is being written about here on another chess site?


Jason Repa    (2008-05-07 06:46:43)
Bird Brain loses in 33 moves!

I guess I shouldn't be surprised at the behavior of this lowlife. After all, I beat him in chess and beat him in debate. I also caught him RED-HANDED telling lies and exposed him for what he is. What else is a sniveling coward to do but dig up old flame wars on the internet from four years ago, that have not an iota of relevance to any of the topics being discussed here. I bet his parents are real proud of him, LOL!

"Black's ...f5 stakes a serious claim to the e4 square and looks towards an attack on White's kingside in the middlegame. However, it weakens Black's own kingside somewhat, and does nothing to contribute to Black's development" My point exactly about 1 f4"

Another typical tactic from a chronic liar....to change the very premise of what was being argued. I'll refresh your memory since you don't have the mental capability of remembering your own words. The statement you made was: "1 f4 at cc seems a waste of white". That is what I contested. I never disputed that there is some weakening of the kingside involved here. But some weakening of the kingside doesn't mean it's a poor opening choice. You're trying to win an argument with lies and misrepresentation. Try being honest and sticking to the facts for once in your life.

My otb tournament rating is currently 2010, but my active rating is not anywhere near what you're suggesting. I'm actually much stronger in both 30 minute active and blitz chess. I won more blitz tournaments in 2007 AND 2008 than anyone else in my region, ahead of 2 FM's. And my performance in active events is in the mid 2100's based on all the otb active events I've played in over the last 5 years.

In the region I play in we don't have many active events. So I've only played in 2 that were rated, and that was over a decade ago. The provisional ratings used were far below what everyone was worth (not just me). We had a strong FM who was competing at 1800 and change, while both his FIDE and national rating were in the neighborhood of 2300. Stranger things have happened in small clubs.

Did anyone notice how the coward won't discuss what HIS national otb rating is? We don't hear a word from him about that. Very telling indeed!

Then the little weasel reposts a game that he already posted in this thread earlier. Could it be that the poor loser whom I CRUSHED in chess, has run out of ammunition with which to compensate for the fact that he lost to me? I've lost 6 games, drew 59 and won 117 on FICGS, including the beating I gave to you. I beat you EASILY and I'm HIGHER RATED than you. Keep crying about that. Its entertaining.

Again, crybaby, if 1.f4 is a waste at cc, why did I gain rating points here playing 1.f4. And why did I beat you so easily at chess? I think I proved on the chess board, that you don't know what you're talking about. All you have is lies, slander, and random usenet group flame wars from 4 years ago. I have FACTS:

I BEAT YOU IN CHESS AND I'M HIGHER RATED THAN YOU ARE.

""Look what happened to Evgeny Alexseev as black - a very strong 2600+ GM at the time - he continued 6 ..b6 7 h3 c5 8 Qe1 Bb7 9 g4 and lost to IM Sengupta." Alexseev lost and the criticisms of IM Sengupta's moves by Mr Repa are quite funny "

You're copying and pasting the same nonsense you posted earlier. Did you even read the words you typed? You're saying "look what happened to Evgeny Alexseev as Black", as if he's the one who lost. Then You switch it around and suggest that Evgeny Alexseev was White and say that he played 9.g4. Are you pretending to be this stupid or is this really how you are? As I said earlier, you're probably making the whole game up, or at least changing moves around, etc, because it doesn't appear anywhere that I could find, and you're still not bright enough to figure out how to post the whole game as you were asked to do earlier. It's a pretty sad state of affairs of that's the ONLY game you can think of to try to smear a legitimate and recognized opening such as Bird's Opening. Whoever played White played very poorly. I spelled out for you the moves that White played that were very poor. Did I use any words too complex for you to understand?

" 1 f4 has been championed by GM Jakubiec who is the only GM who has played it regularly"

This is also pure nonsense. There are MANY strong GM's (and super GM's)who haved played 1.f4 in serious games. GM Henrik Danielsen used it as a MAIN MOVE for many years also.

Keep posting lies, slander, and irrelevant 4 year old flame wars from the internet little man. I defeated you in chess and in debate. I proved that what you said is pure nonsense. All you have is hot air!


Jason Repa    (2008-05-07 06:57:07)
Bird Brain loses in 33 moves!

I guess I shouldn't be surprised at the behavior of this lowlife. After all, I beat him in chess and beat him in debate. I also caught him RED-HANDED telling lies and exposed him for what he is. What else is a sniveling coward to do but dig up old flame wars on the internet from four years ago, that have not an iota of relevance to any of the topics being discussed here. I bet his parents are real proud of him, LOL!

"Black's ...f5 stakes a serious claim to the e4 square and looks towards an attack on White's kingside in the middlegame. However, it weakens Black's own kingside somewhat, and does nothing to contribute to Black's development" My point exactly about 1 f4"

Another typical tactic from a chronic liar....to change the very premise of what was being argued. I'll refresh your memory since you don't have the mental capability of remembering your own words. The statement you made was: "1 f4 at cc seems a waste of white". That is what I contested. I never disputed that there is some weakening of the kingside involved here. But some weakening of the kingside doesn't mean it's a poor opening choice. You're trying to win an argument with lies and misrepresentation. Try being honest and sticking to the facts for once in your life.

My otb tournament rating is currently 2010, but my active rating is not anywhere near what you're suggesting. I'm actually much stronger in both 30 minute active and blitz chess. I won more blitz tournaments in 2007 AND 2008 than anyone else in my region, ahead of 2 FM's. And my performance in active events is in the mid 2100's based on all the otb active events I've played in over the last 5 years.

In the region I play in we don't have many active events. So I've only played in 2 that were rated, and that was over a decade ago. The provisional ratings used were far below what everyone was worth (not just me). We had a strong FM who was competing at 1800 and change, while both his FIDE and national rating were in the neighborhood of 2300. Stranger things have happened in small clubs.

Did anyone notice how the coward won't discuss what HIS national otb rating is? We don't hear a word from him about that. Very telling indeed!

Then the little weasel reposts a game that he already posted in this thread earlier. Could it be that the poor loser whom I CRUSHED in chess, has run out of ammunition with which to compensate for the fact that he lost to me? I've lost 6 games, drew 59 and won 117 on FICGS, including the beating I gave to you. I beat you EASILY and I'm HIGHER RATED than you. Keep crying about that. Its entertaining.

Again, crybaby, if 1.f4 is a waste at cc, why did I gain rating points here playing 1.f4. And why did I beat you so easily at chess? I think I proved on the chess board, that you don't know what you're talking about. All you have is lies, slander, and random usenet group flame wars from 4 years ago. I have FACTS:

I BEAT YOU IN CHESS AND I'M HIGHER RATED THAN YOU ARE.

""Look what happened to Evgeny Alexseev as black - a very strong 2600+ GM at the time - he continued 6 ..b6 7 h3 c5 8 Qe1 Bb7 9 g4 and lost to IM Sengupta." Alexseev lost and the criticisms of IM Sengupta's moves by Mr Repa are quite funny "

You're copying and pasting the same nonsense you posted earlier. Did you even read the words you typed? You're saying "look what happened to Evgeny Alexseev as Black", as if he's the one who lost. Then You switch it around and suggest that Evgeny Alexseev was White and say that he played 9.g4. Are you pretending to be this stupid or is this really how you are? As I said earlier, you're probably making the whole game up, or at least changing moves around, etc, because it doesn't appear anywhere that I could find, and you're still not bright enough to figure out how to post the whole game as you were asked to do earlier. It's a pretty sad state of affairs of that's the ONLY game you can think of to try to smear a legitimate and recognized opening such as Bird's Opening. Whoever played White played very poorly. I spelled out for you the moves that White played that were very poor. Did I use any words too complex for you to understand?

" 1 f4 has been championed by GM Jakubiec who is the only GM who has played it regularly"

This is also pure nonsense. There are MANY strong GM's (and super GM's)who haved played 1.f4 in serious games. GM Henrik Danielsen used it as a MAIN MOVE for many years also.

Keep posting lies, slander, and irrelevant 4 year old flame wars from the internet little man. I defeated you in chess and in debate. I proved that what you said is pure nonsense. All you have is hot air!


Jason Repa    (2008-05-07 12:50:12)
Pablo BACKS DOWN!

And you're the one who started with the insults Pablo. You don't run around calling people "arrogant" because you're frustrated at your own inability to comprehend what

"and in the line with 4...Nf6 (called the Mestel Variation), there is no clear way for Black to win his pawn back."

means. And challenging someone to a chess match then backing down as you have done is BEYOND PATHETIC!


Jason Repa    (2008-05-07 13:10:18)
Declining the From

"From's Gambit ... Hi, is there a valid way to decline the From's Gambit without falling onto the Kings Gambit?"

That's the usual way. Although I can't see why anyone would want to decline the gambit. All variations indeed seem to be quite good for White.

"Even if the Froms Gambit may not be sound, I do not like to be defending, especially against players stronger than myself."

In that case you might want to switch to 1.Nf3 or 1.b3 with the idea of transposing into the Bird's Opening later. This is what I often do in OTB play. Of course Black doesn't necessarily have to allow you to transpose, though.



-------------

Moderator : This topic is closed. As a reminder :

11. 1. Netiquette

(...) No player may post in forums or send to another member any voluntary message that contains abusive, insulting, provocating, advertising, vulgar, foul, racist, sexist or other discriminatory or politically sensitive content. Doing so may lead to being immediately and permanently banned. You agree that the webmaster, administrator and moderators have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic, comment or message at any time should they see fit. Responding to a provocative message is strictly forbidden and will lead to get a limited access to the server during one month a first time, two months the second one and so on. In this case, please just warn the moderator or webmaster in private.

-------------


Jason Repa    (2008-05-07 13:43:09)
Lasker Variation of the From's Gambit



[moderated : rule 11.1 Netiquette]

My correspondence chess game with Marc-Eric Plante finally wrapped up after over a year. It was an interesting game, IMO, and I thought that Marc had made some improvements over what had been played before by Black, such as 10...Qe7!? (instead of the usual 10...Bf5). However, it's been my thought that the Lasker Variation of the From's gambit might, at the end of the day, be lost for Black with perfect play. I'm not sure of Black could have done anything different in this game. http://chessmusings.blogspot.com/2008/05/from-night.html


Jason Repa    (2008-05-08 03:13:22)
Pavasovic vs Baklan

This game was played a couple weeks ago in the 2008 European Individual Championship in Plovdiv.
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1491774

It's hard to believe a GM would play this in a real game. It's an old cheapo line of the Tarrasch French where White gives up two pieces, then dangles a third, for an attack. Black's defense is simple and intuitive. He gives back one piece to diffuse the attack and wins a relatively simply endgame. I first came across this when someone tried it against me in a bullet game on playchess.com. Even at bullet time controls I was able to come up with 13...Ndxe5 (not too difficult to find) and consolidate the material advantage.


Jason Repa    (2008-05-13 00:43:41)
How to Win against the Pin!

This was an interesting game I played last year. My opponent blamed his tardiness for the loss, but the position seems quite resignable for Black as far as I'm concerned.

http://members.shaw.ca/winnipeg_chess/beating_internet_trolls_at_chess.htm


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-05-13 11:30:35)
French traps

The French defence is one of the best replies to 1 e4 - accidents however are always possible as the following correspondence game shows with black playing into a lost position after just 13 moves: 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.f4 c5 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Be3 cxd4 8.Nxd4 Qb6 9.Qd2 Qxb2 10.Rb1 Qa3 11.Bb5 Nxd4 12.Bxd4 Bb4 13.O-O O-O ?? (black had to play 13 ..a6 although he will still be under pressure) 14 Rb3 Qa5 15.Qe3 Nb6 16.Qg3 Nc4 17 f5! and the correspondence game finished Rd8 18.Rf4 Bf8 19.Rg4 Kh8 20.f6 g6 21.Rh4 h6 22.Kh1 Kg8 23.Qh3 Kh7 24.Bc5 Rd6 25.g4 Qd8 26.g5 h5 27.Rxh5+ These things happen OTB but French defence players have known of this since Rechlis (2525) - Zueger (2448) 2001 which went 19 f6 g6 20 Rh4 a6 21 Qh3 h5 22 Rxh5!! gxh5 23 Qxh5 axb5 24 Kf2 and white won. since then 13 0-0 has been avoided. Of course at cc a player has time to research the databases and access to powerful chess engines at no cost.


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-05-13 12:07:15)
Trusting engines

I should add that if you play through the game with an engine it will show black doing ok and even better some time after the position is lost. So its a good example of not just playing the move the engine suggests but actually analysing the position.


Jason Repa    (2008-05-13 12:54:06)
Repa vs Stephenson 1-0

My obsessive fan is quoting my game with Bucsa Ioan played last year. Actually you have it backwards Stephenson. I trusted my database, which wasn't up to date. I wasn't even consulting an engine until around move 18, when it's already lost for Black. I thought quite a bit about alternative lines in this game, but found myself agreeing with the Psakhis analysis. That line is recommended by Psakhis in his book "French Defence - Steinitz, Classical, and other Systems". Additionally, 13...0-0 has been played by the likes of GM Dreev, as well as GM Marjanovic, as recently as 2003. But alas, it pays to keep your databases up to date for correspondence chess.

The game was a valuable learning experience for me. I'm very happy that it occurred. My otb opponents will never get me in that position as a result :)

I can't help but feel sorry for you Stephenson. Firstly I'm sorry that you don't have any of your own games worthy of publication, and that you need to vicariously live through me and post my chess games. Secondly, I'm sorry that you don't play otb chess and appreciate the joy of playing chess using your own mind. But then again, in your case, maybe that's a good thing. :)


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-05-13 13:22:56)
Provocation

I am sorry I cannot respond to a lot of what you have posted as such a response would breach the rules. I have not examined all your losses - just the French games - so I do not know how instructive they are I will try to review them later but I can't promise anything. However I am a great believer in checking lines I play with the database to see whats been learnt and how the top GM's handle the particular lines. All I learnt from my loss was not to play that particular line and to cut out all dodgy openings. In fact the line you played is not the strongest and I believe black can equalise - unfortunately I found an even stronger line for white which seems to refute the entire variation. There is however a book by an english GM from 2007 which looks at sicilian side lines and claims that there is no refutation. When I have time I will stick all the analysis up and people can make up their own minds. On correspondence taking someone's OTB chess to the next level I am a bit sceptical. It definitely has a significant effect on the accuracy of opening play and this can get some valuable wins by itself. But other progress needs separate study and training. Silmans Reassess your chess for example will increase the rating of any one below FIDE 2300 if studied intensively IMO.


Hannes Rada    (2008-05-14 22:04:53)
Opening Favorites and taboos in cc chess

It's quite interesting to look at the top level cc - player's opening favorites. Against 1.e4: Almost everybody is playing Sicilian, Sveshnikov and Najdorf No more Dragon oder other Sicilian lines seems to be playable at top level. 1.... e6 (French) and 1....c6 Caro Kann are rarely played. A little bit more frequently is 1....e5. But I think that also the old Ruy Lopez is not really popular among the cc cracks. Against 1.d4: Here seems to be more diversity: But I think The Slav is definitely the most popular Black's defense, followed by Nimzo Indian, Kings Indian and Queens Gambit. Benoni and Wolga Gambit seems to be dead here. What do you think, is there no more space for French, Caro Kann and Aljechin Defense in todays cc practice ? Is Dutch and Modern Benoni no longer playable ? In the sixties Hans Berliner won the ICCF championship with Aljechin Defense


Rodolfo d Ettorre    (2008-05-15 15:51:10)
Ruy Lopez!

I have just got nice drawns with black against a Ruy Lopez, Open Variation, game 20196.


Hannes Rada    (2008-05-15 23:06:25)
Openings

Hi Andrew, " It certainly seems a lot easier to get a draw against e4 at cc." I've the same feeling. But the top player vanOsteroom prefers definitely 1.e4 ! Does anybody know if 1.e4 or 1.d4 is played more often here at FICGS ? "He played it 3 times including the critical line 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 c5 4 d5 exd5 5 cxd5 d6 6 e4 g6 7 f4 etc and got 3 draws against opposition of 2150, 2300 and 2400." Can this be considered as a success ? 50 % against lower rated opponents ? Normally Benoni is played when you want or have to win with black ... However Hector Walsh seems to have some fighting spirit. Andrew do you know the IECG server ? From time to time I get invitations from the IECG guys for their tournamengs, but never played there.


Ilmars Cirulis    (2008-05-18 12:58:25)
One more...

What about seeing score of white and black in thematic tournaments?


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-05-19 06:35:14)
Major update (may 2008)

Hello to all, a new update including :

- Regular tournaments with prizes (see thread "Free tournaments with prizes")

- Norms, titles and prizes are now announced by email.

- Players with Epoints are shown in the connected players list (My messages).

- Affiliate links : For each new player referred by your link (see My account) posted on the world wide web, 1 Epoint will be added to your account.

- Search games function improved : You can now search games by opening and by rating (White & Black)


All feedback welcome :)


Arnab Sengupta    (2008-05-21 14:01:58)
Help!

Does anybody has some better moves for black in the game between Kramnik-Aronian, Wijk aan Zee 2008, after Kramnik's 25. Nc3 dxc3 26.Qxc3+? somebody help me plz


Graham Cridland    (2008-05-21 21:55:39)
dxc5

Nice, safe route to a draw, which seems inevitable in that position anyway. Black's kingside is well defended and there aren't any obvious d-file tricks, so the best move from a wasted-effort standpoint might be a draw offer.


Michael Aigner    (2008-05-23 10:30:13)
White is simply better

Hi Arnab, in my opinion it is too late to look for improvements after move 26. I think white has just the better game (for ever) because of the unsafe black king. Regards Michael


Benjamin Block    (2008-05-25 16:22:40)
Black don´t win

But black will not win? Only white?


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-05-25 18:33:27)
Statistics

Statistics may look like CEGT or SSDF ones (ie. Rybka 2.3.2 vs. Rybka 2.3.1, with probably more draws as the engines versions are the same) but whatever the engine, it will win as White and Black sometimes.


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-05-26 12:19:28)
Rybka vs Rybka

Ok, we all know that engines are not free will. With no randomizer, the regular start position, "normal" settings (do not avoid a draw at any price, regular values) and a large opening book [which is a quite good randomizer itself], I'm quite sure statistics after 500,000 games will look like 50% if Rybka 3 #1 & #2 play as both White & Black, 51 to 53% if Rybka 3 #1 play as White only while Rybka 3 #2 play as Black only, about the same (but not exactly) for Fritz 11 or other engines.


Arnab Sengupta    (2008-05-27 16:53:56)
help

ok! so we came up with this variation- 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nf3 c6 5.Bg5 h6 6.Bh4 dxc4 7.e4 g5 8.Bg3 b5 9.Be2 Bb7 10.O-O Nbd7 11.Ne5 Bg7 12.Nxd7 Nxd7 13.Bd6 a6 14.a4 e5 15.Bg4 exd4 16.e5 c5 17.Re1 Nxe5 18.Bxe5 O-O 19.Bxg7 Kxg7 20.Ne2 f5 21.Bh5 f4 22.b4 cxb3 23.Qxb3 Qd5 24.Qh3 Bc8 25.Nc3 dxc3 26.Qxc3+ Qd4 27.Qf3 Ra7 28.axb5 Rf6 29.h3 but now what? what should BLACK play here? Please i need your opinion to finish this variation. Do you think Black has any chance of Drawing the game here?


Arnab Sengupta    (2008-05-27 17:08:39)
Help

Well two moves comes in mind for BLACK 29....Re6 or 29....Rc7 I think both moves holds fort for Black. What say?


Michael Aigner    (2008-05-27 18:35:33)
Sorry but white is going to win

I think black has a maximum 10 % drawing chances in this position. e.g. [Event "Blitz:120'"] [Site "PC"] [Date "????.??.??"] [Round "?"] [White "New game"] [Black "Naum 3.1"] [Result "*"] [PlyCount "65"] [TimeControl "7200"] {256MB, Hiarcs10.ctg, HOME-PC} 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Nf3 c6 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bh4 dxc4 7. e4 g5 8. Bg3 b5 9. Be2 Bb7 10. O-O Nbd7 11. Ne5 Bg7 12. Nxd7 Nxd7 13. Bd6 a6 14. a4 e5 15. Bg4 exd4 16. e5 c5 17. Re1 Nxe5 18. Bxe5 O-O 19. Bxg7 Kxg7 20. Ne2 f5 21. Bh5 f4 22. b4 cxb3 23. Qxb3 Qd5 24. Qh3 Bc8 25. Nc3 dxc3 26. Qxc3+ Qd4 27. Qf3 Ra7 28. axb5 Rf6 29. h3 Qd6 (29... Re6 30. Qa3 Rxe1+ (30... Qd6 31. Rxe6 Bxe6 32. Rd1 Qe5 33. b6 Re7 34. Rc1 g4 35. hxg4 Rd7 36. Qa5 Qd6 37. Qxa6 and White wins) 31. Rxe1 Bf5 32. b6 and White wins) 30. Re8 Be6 31. h4 g4 32. Bxg4 Bf7 33. Rc8 and White is clearly better Regards Michael


Jason Repa    (2008-06-04 20:22:20)
Poker

No, your ability to understand simple concepts is what is weak here groves. You keep whining that your paltry 1600 chess rating shouldn't matter because you haven't played chess in a couple of years, but what difference does that make? Are elo points easier to obtain now? And what about Go? You play that game regularly, yet you have a pathetic 1300 rating at that as well. You better open a window before you think up another lame excuse....I wouldn't want you to die from smoke inhalation.

I don't know how many times I need to keep repeating myself in order for the point to penetrate your skull, but your comment about "mastering the mechanics" of the game is pure nonsense. You speak as if the entirety of poker theory can be equated to memorizing basic strategy in blackjack. You seem to think the discussion of calculating EV is based purely on figuring out pot-odds and how that relates to the number of outs, etc, but if you had the incipience of a clue about the game you'd realize that there is much MORE involved than that. Poker is an information game and all the information you have at your disposal, such as the temperament and mood of your opponent(s), your perceived table image (or at least your interpretation of it), the history of the action that has occurred so far, the tells that you pick up and the false tells that you may be sending to your opponents, etc, goes into the calculation of the EV on any given play. The better a player is able to conduct these evaluations and convert them into value, at least intuitively....the better a poker player they are. Even online poker has some tell/false-tell action as the response time can be varied.

Re-read my previous post where I mentioned that mistakes can take various forms. I clearly state, and in simple terms such that even you should be able to grasp, that there is more to the game than straightforward arithmetic calculations.

And I realize that you don't work, but geez, can you not find something better to do with your time than try to provoke people on the internet? Why don't you use all that free time you have on your hands to learn how to play Chess or Go beyond the level of a rank beginner?


Jason Repa    (2008-06-08 11:09:30)
Nickel vs Hydra

I believe that Nickel used various chess engines to assist him with error-checking and analysis, similar to what any good corr. player does.

I especially liked the game where Nickel beat Hydra with the Black side of a French Tarrasch


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-06-20 20:45:46)
Why

Playing on in a completely lost position is to get to the next rating adjustment. Particularly when the loss would take them below a threshold - in this case 2300. Your opponent will probably resign on July 1st. Nice game by the way although I didnt like 6 ..Bxf3 (why give up the bishop?)I think 6..Bh5 then e6-d5 and black is fine. 12 Rc1 was a great move! A few moves later and black is suddenly in big trouble


Normajean Yates    (2008-07-13 23:01:01)
help - chat column missing

I can see a white-background black-text chat column / frame on the right in some of my computer, but they are absent in others. Can someone please help? Windows XP, firefox 2, adblock plus [popups enables for ficgs]


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-07-14 21:41:51)
hmmm

I remember you previously posted about this game having, after many hours, found a problem like win. It sesm that this was wrong! I guess that 89 ...Be7 followed by g5 holds the draw and white just got the order of moves mixed up and played g5 first. It happens.... On the other hand 25 ..Bd3 seems unecessarily risky while 25 ...Ra5 looks fine for black. Still you kept up the pressure and often you make your own luck :))


Normajean Yates    (2008-07-15 03:25:32)
is mirroring moves legal on ficgs?

suppose I am playing a tournament. I need only 1 point [1/2=draw,1=win]. in one game I am white. In another game I am black.

In the game where I am black, I wait for opp to move, say move w1. Then in the game where I am white, I make the move w1, then I wait for opp's reply, say b1. Now in the game where I am black I move b1. And so on..

So i am guranteed exactly 1 point (1/2+1/2 = 1 + 0 = 0+1 = 1).

Is this legal? If not, by which rule?

Thibault?


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-07-16 00:32:46)
Mirroring moves

Mirroring moves is (of course) strictly forbidden, rule 11.3 [end] :

"It's strictly forbidden to play simultaneously the same game with black on a board and white on the other, against two different players or the same one, playing black moves like the opponent in the game with white and playing white moves like the opponent in the game with black."


Wolfgang Utesch    (2008-07-17 04:57:26)
In example ....

... Both players of a match decide to play Sveshnikov with white and black, so it is normal that the first 8 moves are mirrored, may be that both players decide to play a special way in this opening with white and black, it can be that 20 moves are mirrored. Where is the problem? What can be wrong?


Wolfgang Utesch    (2008-07-17 16:03:58)
May be I'm a fool ....

...., but what is the simple difference between playing the same opening with black and white over 10 and more moves and MIRRORING? When is ending the first and when beginning the second?


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-07-17 18:42:37)
Mirroring moves

Let's say you (player A) play B with White on board 1 and play C with Black on board 2 :

Case 1 : C plays 1.e4 on board 2, then you play 1.e4 on board 1, B plays 1...e5 on board 1, you play 1...e5 on board 2 and so on... this is mirroring.

Case 2 : You play 1.e4 on board 1, then C plays 1.e4 on board 2, you play 1...e5 on board 2, B plays 1...e5 on board 1 and so on... this is not mirroring.

The dates of the moves say it all.


Don Groves    (2008-07-27 05:28:05)
Strange Go games

Perhaps black thinks he has a better chance on two boards instead of one:
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=4084


Don Groves    (2008-07-27 05:33:34)
.. and another

Black new about ponnukis but nothing else. White had fun eating ponnukis but got full and called the arbitrator.
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=9939


Marc Lacrosse    (2008-07-27 19:36:41)
The specifics of match play ...

Tanks to FICGS championships interesting formula I just entered Wch 005 in a quarter final 8-games match (against GM Balabaev).
This is the first time I have to play several simultaneous games against the same opponent in correspondence play.
There are interesting questions related to this unusual kind of tournament.
First of all, what kind of opening(s) should you play, and more precisely is it better to vary or to go for the same opening in several games?
Having had a look at my opponents former games I had prepared quite a few options.
As Black I decided to rely on my favorite Bc5 sicilian defence
Four identical games developped and very soon it appeared that these games should be decisive for the whole match
For long I was afraid that my opponent could come with some decisive prepared analysis leading to a 4-0 lead ...
But the opposite happened and all four games ended (draw by position repetition) before I had left my opening prep, after less than one month of play.
Thus I am left with four games where I am white
A considerable advantage IMHO ...

On this precise topic I wonder what is the opinion of top players here : is it better to be the one who vary early or should you go along your favorite analysis as long as your opponent won't diverge himself in case of match play

I have never read anything on this topic anywhere ...

Marc


Marc Lacrosse    (2008-07-28 15:59:14)
I see ...

Hi Thibault

OK I see : you were happy (as I am) with four draws in one single well-prepared line as Black but went on missing the qualification as your four white games were also drawn (and Farit's rating was superior to yours).
Maybe I will suffer the same fate ...
But as i have to win at least one game I feel this is easier to achieve with white ...
As white I am busy varying the positions a little and trying to play more actively ...
We will see...

By the way I think that the rule according which the highest rating is qualified in case of eight draws is really a significant advantage ...
... but i agree that we need a way to adjudicate drawn matches.

Marc


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-07-28 18:18:20)
8 games matches

"But as i have to win at least one game I feel this is easier to achieve with white ..."

Theorically (only ?). Anyway I made this choice during my match because I had about 80 running games at that time (quite inhuman :)) so I managed my rating :/

You know that this time control 30 days + 1 day / move is quite different from classical 40 days + 40 days / 10 moves, the pressure in the 8 games may be important, also the psychological factor [playing White feels more (sometimes too much) secure ie(?): Xavier won his 2 games with Black in the first Candidates final] and I'm convinced that every game counts these ways. The tie break rule (highest rating is qualified in case of eight draws) did not apply so often by the way.


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-08-10 07:58:24)
Fischers move

White has chosen 12 g3 - in all 4 games - a slightly unusual move order - but I expect black to head down the main "highway" where very few deviations have been seen on the white side. 4 wins or 4 draws? The next 3/4 moves will determine the nature of the game - very interesting!


Normajean Yates    (2008-08-12 02:10:55)
Okay, requestiong annnotation!

Consider this latvian fraser 'book' line:
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 f5 3. Nxe5 Nc6 4. Qh5+ g6 5. Nxg6 Nf6 6. Qh3 hxg6 7. Qxh8 Qe7. [yes I know it is in crisis :)]
well, opp played 8. Nc3 [which i couldnt find in any database] and I was already in serious trouble after:

8...fxe4 9. Be2 Nd4 10. O-O.

Cant see any counterplay by black.

[not on this site; and the game is in progress but has moved on a few moves beyond this point - so I am not cheating!]

Anyone care to comment on - ahem, annotate - my [black's] 8th and 9th move?


Phil Cook    (2008-08-12 07:34:16)
Morales Vs Cook

[Event "Single game, E4EC"] [Site "http://gameknot.com/"] [Date "2008.04.22"] [Round "-"] [White "Morales, Rafael (rafafallo)"] [Black "Cook, Phil (Kiwi)"] [Result "0-1"] [WhiteElo "1078"] [BlackElo "1170"] [TimeControl "10/30"] 1. d4 {(D 00 Queeens Pawn,Chigorin varation) 1. d4 d5 2. Nc3 } d5 2. Nc3 {(D 00 Queeens Pawn,Chigorin varation) 1. d4 d5 2. Nc3 e6..not commonly played } e6 {(D 00 Queeens Pawn,Chigorin varation) 1. d4 d5 2. Nc3 e6..not commonly played} 3. a3 {3.blocking ..Bb4} h6 4. e4 a6 5. g3 dxe4 6. Nxe4 Nf6 {3. ....... h6 4. e4 a6 5. g3 dxe4 6. Nxe4 Nf6 attemps white into another exchange} 7. Bg2 {7.Bg2 defends } Nxe4 8. Bxe4 c6 9. c4 Be7 10. d5 {7. Nxe4 8. Bxe4 c6 9. c4 Be7 10. d5 (white here,trying to open the middle up) so black attacks} cxd5 11. cxd5 O-O 12. dxe6 {12.dxe6,,(black gives up a pawn or does he)} Qxd1+ 13. Kxd1 Rd8+ 14. Bd2 fxe6 {12. dxe6 Qxd1+ 13. Kxd1 Rd8+ 14. Bd2 fxe6(wins the pawn back,has white in disarray here)} 15. Nf3 Bf6 16. Rb1 Nd7 17. b4 Ne5 18. Ke2 Nxf3 19. Bxf3 {15. Nf3 Bf6 16. Rb1 Nd7 17. b4 Ne5 18. Ke2 Nxf3 19. Bxf3 (note whites black bishop)} Rb8 20. a4 b5 21. a5 Bb7 22. Rbc1 Bxf3+ {19. Bxf3 Rb8 20. a4 b5 21. a5 Bb7 22. Rbc1 Bxf3(white lost contol and game from here,yet plods on)} 23. Kxf3 Rxd2 {22. Rbc1 Bxf3+ 23. Kxf3 Rxd(loss of bishop)} 24. Rc6 Rd3+ 25. Ke4 Rbd8 26. Rxe6 Rd3d6 27. Rxd6 Rxd6 28. Rc1 Rd4+ 29. Kf5 Rxb4 30. Kg6 Rg4+ 31. Kf5 Rc4 32. Rd1 Rc5+ 33. Ke4 b4 34. Rb1 Rb5 35. Rb3 Bc3 36. f4 Rxa5 37. f5 Ra3 0-1


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-08-12 08:54:10)
Latvian

I dont think black has anything better than 8...fxe maybe 9...d5 is better. But Whites 8 Nc3 seems a very good strong simple move. Its strange that it has not been analysed because the position has been looked at by Nunn and Watson - but that was in the pre Rybka era. Now 3...Nc6 looks too risky at cc. So 3 Nxe5 Qf6 is the best chance. Game 18479 (ongoing) is perhaps the most that black can hope for - for some people not much fun but for latvian fans survival is a triumph!


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-08-12 21:32:49)
No novelty

F Perez-Cruz v F Acosta 1994 correspondence Massow Memorial (1-0 32) 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 f5 3 Nxe5 Nc6 4 Qh5+ g6 5 Nxg6 Nf6 6 Qh3 hxg6 7 Qxh8 Qe7 8 Nc3! The game continued with Nb4 9 d4?! (9 d3 looks like an easy win) Nxe4 10 Nxe4 Qxe4+ 11 Be3 Kf7?! (had to play 11..f4 12 Bd3 Nxd3 [12 ..Qxg2 13 Qe5+ Be7 13 Be4] 13 cxd3 Qxg2 14 Rf1 d6 when he can fight on) 12 Bd3 Nxd3 13 cxd3 with a won position. If I faced this Nc6 line I would play after 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 f5 3 Nxe5 Nc6 4 d4! (John Nunn's refutation) this squelches all blacks hopes for play. What now for black? 4..Nf6 5 Nxc6 dxc6 6 e5 which looks like a pawn odds game. I dont know.


Normajean Yates    (2008-08-13 03:53:11)
RANDOM design prob: eiffel pic ..

I set design to random. The eiffel tower picture has then become so high-contrast and high-hue that at first sight it looks like 3 dots or so on a black background.[i have this light grey background on this login...]


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-08-15 18:00:45)
Nunn "refutation"

Here is a summary of the analysis after e4 e5 2 Nf3 f5 3 Nxe5 Nc6 4 d4!: a.) 4…fxe4 5.Nxc6 dxc6 6.Qh5+ Ke7 b.) 4…Nxd5 5.dxe5 d6 (5…Qe7 6.Qd4 and White is a pawn up, threatening Nc3-d5 – Nunn) 6.Bf4! “Black's position flat out sucks!” c.) 4…Nf6 5.Nxc6 dxc6 6.e5 with a clear extra pawn. d.) 4…Qh4!? 5.Nf3 Qxe4+ 6.Be2 Black's Queen is exposed eg 6…Nf6 7.0-0 Be7 8.Re1 with advantage 8…0-0? loses to 9.Bc4+. e) 4...Qe7 is not analysed. 5 Nc3! (5 Nxc6 Qxe4+ 6 Be2 Qxc6 7 0-0 d5 8 Nc3 Kf7! and blacks not too bad) 5...fxe4 (5...Nxe5 6 Nb5!)6 Nb5 Kd8 7 Bf4 Nxe5 (7..Nf6 8 Nxc7!) 8 dxe5 and black cant develop eg Nh6 9 e6!d6 10 Qd5! In line a) 4..fxe4 5 Nxc6 Black can try bxc6!?(instead of dxc6)6 Qh5+ Ke7 planning to play Kf7 and d5. This might be the best try and although I white is better the positions are a bit unclear. After 4..fxe4 white also has 5 Bc4 d5 6 Bb5 Qd6 (6..Ne7 7 0-0 is strong) 7 c4 a6 when white will probably get the e pawn but black gets the bishop pair. So I am not now sure its a refutation!


Phil Cook    (2008-08-16 10:54:51)
(D 00 Queeens Pawn,Chigorin varation)

Morales Vs Cook [Event "Single game, E4EC"] [Date "2008.04.22"] [Round "-"] [White "Morales, Rafael (rafafallo)"] [Black "Cook, Phil (Kiwi)"] [Result "0-1"] [WhiteElo "1078"] [BlackElo "1170"] [TimeControl "10/30"] 1. d4 {(D 00 Queeens Pawn,Chigorin varation) 1. d4 d5 2. Nc3 } d5 2. Nc3 {(D 00 Queeens Pawn,Chigorin varation) 1. d4 d5 2. Nc3 e6..not commonly played } e6 {(D 00 Queeens Pawn,Chigorin varation) 1. d4 d5 2. Nc3 e6..not commonly played} 3. a3 {3.blocking ..Bb4} h6 4. e4 a6 5. g3 dxe4 6. Nxe4 Nf6 {3. ....... h6 4. e4 a6 5. g3 dxe4 6. Nxe4 Nf6 attemps white into another exchange} 7. Bg2 {7.Bg2 defends } Nxe4 8. Bxe4 c6 9. c4 Be7 10. d5 {7. Nxe4 8. Bxe4 c6 9. c4 Be7 10. d5 (white here,trying to open the middle up) so black attacks} cxd5 11. cxd5 O-O 12. dxe6 {12.dxe6,,(black gives up a pawn or does he)} Qxd1+ 13. Kxd1 Rd8+ 14. Bd2 fxe6 {12. dxe6 Qxd1+ 13. Kxd1 Rd8+ 14. Bd2 fxe6(wins the pawn back,has white in disarray here)} 15. Nf3 Bf6 16. Rb1 Nd7 17. b4 Ne5 18. Ke2 Nxf3 19. Bxf3 {15. Nf3 Bf6 16. Rb1 Nd7 17. b4 Ne5 18. Ke2 Nxf3 19. Bxf3 (note whites black bishop)} Rb8 20. a4 b5 21. a5 Bb7 22. Rbc1 Bxf3+ {19. Bxf3 Rb8 20. a4 b5 21. a5 Bb7 22. Rbc1 Bxf3(white lost contol and game from here,yet plods on)} 23. Kxf3 Rxd2 {22. Rbc1 Bxf3+ 23. Kxf3 Rxd(loss of bishop)} 24. Rc6 Rd3+ 25. Ke4 Rbd8 26. Rxe6 Rd3d6 27. Rxd6 Rxd6 28. Rc1 Rd4+ 29. Kf5 Rxb4 30. Kg6 Rg4+ 31. Kf5 Rc4 32. Rd1 Rc5+ 33. Ke4 b4 34. Rb1 Rb5 35. Rb3 Bc3 36. f4 Rxa5 37. f5 Ra3 0-1


Benjamin Block    (2008-08-18 08:52:18)
Try to translate!

I think it is something like that?
Hello Xavier and first congratulations on your victory in the match which t'opposait the MI (ICCF) Gino Figlio [Peru] in the final candidates. You should avoid at all costs void in all parties, finally brought blacks t'ont chance, how do you explain this result? X
avier: Hello, thank you for the congratulations. It is true that in case of zero for all parties, the regulation states Figlio winner in the event of a tie with victory (s) and defeat (s) I won the match. So I had to take risks in attacking and it is with blacks that I did it because I thought Gino, in these parts, expected without taking risks to ensure the void.
-- Can you tell us about how you approached this match against Gino and his conduct as different phases of the game?
X: It's pretty simple, in this match I was not at all favorite because with more than 200 ELO points FICGS to my disadvantage, and Gino titled Master International, with more than 2480 ELO ICCF point, I thought I n ' not resist going on 8 simultaneous games as a part everything is possible but on 8 parts ... it was for me a great challenge! In the course of the game I played diversity in my beginnings with white 4 parts 4 different strokes: 1.e4 1.d4 1.c4 1.Cf3. Gino did the same: 1.e4 1.d4 1.Cf3 1.Cc3. What made me doubt also because 1.Cc3 surprised me, I thought he had planned an early tonitruand and this is where I said that I should take risks with blacks. As the different phases of the game I assured the zero positions balanced for me concacrer deal has two parts, one with blanks and one with the black for at least make a difference in part to ensure victory. And ultimately it 3 victories me back, which seemed impossible given the quality of the game Gino played on this site to reach the final of the championship candidates.
-- You have made during a championship course without fault, no losses to report, you also posters statistics stratospheric to 78% against an average elo to about 2200, what's your secret?
X: My secret? I have no secret. If I had a secret I do not dévoilerais if I do win more! I think I got a little lucky because he is required by little I am not qualified to stage 3 (round-robin final) because there were 3 players equally and I had l 'advantage classifying the departure of this tournament as indicated by the regulation. As for my statistics, it is also thanks to the errors of my opponents who allowed me to win parts in balance.
-- What do you think the system mid-ko, semi-all-round championship FICGS and its new départages in matches in 8 parties? What changes would it be?
X: Very good question! The system mid-ko for me is a little too fast since a coup by day is overtime analyses to operate a complicated position, which is difficult when several parties in progress. Especially when you work. It is perhaps also through this pace that my opponents lack of time, made some uncertainty regarding postions or exploited my mistakes. But the pace has an advantage over the cadences ICCF which is 5 days a coup is that the parties had to 5 times less time! The départage new games to 8 parts is excellent, forcing the favorite to ensure all matches to nil win this duel and otherwise obtain an additional victory against the challenger is a very well thought out. The amendment that I could make is perhaps time management which is fast for a game system per server. Perhaps increase the clock starting 15 days, starting with 45 against 30 days at this time. And also the possibility of taking a vacation only on the tournament underway to manage other parts of the site. For example, take 7 days vacation on a chess tournament championship and be able to play a tournament Big Chess, Go or another chess tournament during the holidays. Being able to choose a start date of holidays in advance would also be appreciated.
-- Why t'être invested in correspondence chess? T'apportent there are other rewards compared to traditional chess and blitz?
X: I prefer chess match over time. For the classical chess is often play the weekend at a specific time and often on the move to make a tournament. The advantage for me, correspondence chess is that I can connect at any time to play my shots, which allows me, for example, making family meals on weekends and late at night to play a coup, which is not possible chess classics.
-- You knew not to succumb to the temptation and you only play a very reasonable number of parties on the site throughout the championship, do you think nevertheless that the correspondence chess are addictive and at what point? Did they affect your everyday life?
X: Yes! Limiting my number of games in progress is essential for me to try to have parts of quality rather than quantity. Have a lot of parts simultaneously is still something very difficult to manage! This is perhaps the key to my victory against Figlio, I watched its games in progress, it had nearly 90 on the site of the ICCF, it has been felt on his time devoted to analysis our parties on FICGS 8. On the everyday life impacts are family because it is true that I spend more time to analyze the parts and less time with my family, which is quite difficult for me. But when the results are there I do not regret!
-- What do you think about the current position of engines for analysis (Rybka, Shredder, Fritz and others) in correspondence chess? What are the qualities you complementary core player by correspondence, now centaur with the machine for legs?
X: The engines of analyses in chess matches are used by 95% of players ... Now we must adapt and learn to use these machines to calculate. Car simply play the best shot of Rybka 3, Fritz 12 or Hiarcs 12 mentally without thinking leads to zero if the opponent does the same or possibly lose if the opponent gives himself the trouble to consider using them as well. Knowing that when you're in the middle part of these programs give you often 4 to 5 strokes assessed similarly, and that is that we must choose the right time when it is not even necessarily cited by the analysis engine ...
-- You get the Big Chess now on the site, curiosity or interest? What do you think of this strange version of chess?
X: For curiosity and fun and I think Rybka 3 is not yet the Big Chess! This version is almost unprecedented I did not know this form of chess before therefore the one who invented this game was very well done! About I'm the one who asks you a question on the Big chess ... Is there possibility of castle with this game if so, how? (Editor's note: No, it is impossible to castle the Big Chess)
-- And finally the question that everyone arises, especially Francis and Wolfgang disputing that the second final candidates, think you can defend your title next year? :)
X: of course! I will defend the title! I would like if possible to know the timing and pace of the match. And I wish Francis and Wolfgang a beautiful final! I must honor in this competition which is well organized!
-- The match should be able to start during the first week of January 2009, the pace will again 30 days and 1 additional day by coup. Thank you for your answers, and even congratulations for this excellent performance!
X: Thank you! And see you! Bonne continuation to all and good parties!


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-08-18 16:06:16)
translation

I will have a go off the top of my head at giving a sense of the interview in english (I dont know the phrase tonitruand but I am guessing it means dynamic!)?: Hi Xavier and first of all congratulations on your success in the candidates final match against IM (ICCF) Gino Figlio [Peru] You had to avoid drawing all the games and finally you succeded with the black pieces. How did that happen? Xavier: Hi thank you. Its true that if all the games had been drawn then under the rules Figlio would have won whereas if the match was drawn but with a win and loss I would win. Because of this I had to take risks and attack. It was with Black that I did this because I thought that Gino would play safely to be sure of a draw. - Tell us how you approched the match and how the different phases of the game went x: Its quite simple, I was not the favorite I have 200 ELO less on FICGS and Gino is an IM on ICCF with a 2480 rating. I did not think I could survive 8 games at once - in a single game anything is possible but 8 games .... it was a big challenge for me! In the openings I chose 4 different moves 1 e4 1 d4 1 c4 1 Nf3 Gino chose 1 e4 1 d4 1 c4 1 Nc3 I was surpised by 1 Nc3 because I was expecting dynamic openings and it was then that I decided I must take some risks with black. I kept most of the games balanced with a draw in hand and concentrated on 2 games 1 white and 1 black to get a result. In the end I got 3 wins which seemed an impossibility given the quality of the games Gino had played on this site to reach the final. - you have not lost any games in the championship and you have fantastic statistics 78% against an average elo of about 2200. What is your secret? x: My secret? I havent any secret and if I did I would not say because I would not win anymore! I think I have been a bit lucky because in the the Round Robin final there were 3 of us on the same score and I went through under the rules because of my rating. As for my statistics I was helped by mistakes by opponents who allowed me to win some drawn games. - What do you think of the system for the FICGS championship (round robin and knock out matches)and what changes would you make? x: Very good question. The matches are a bit too fast for me - 1 day per move when there are hours of analysis needed to exploit a complicated position its difficult when you have several games running Particularly if you are working. Perhaps that is why my opponents have made errors or failed to exploit my mistakes. But this time limit has an advantage over ICCF where it is 5 days per move the games here are 5 times quicker! Having 8 game matches is an excellent idea and obliging the favorite to draw all the games and the challenger to get a at least 1 victory is very well thought out. The change that I would suggest is to have 15 days extra starting time that is 45 days at the start instead of 30 and also the possibilty to take holidays for tournaments for example take 7 days for championship games and to be able to play big chess go or another chess tournament during the holiday. To be able to choose the start of a holiday in advance would also be good. - Why do you like cc and how does it compare to blitz and normal chess? x: I prefer cc because of the time factor. Classical chess is often played at the week end at a fixed time and you have to travel to the tournament. The advantage for me at cc is that I can connect at any time to play a move which allows me for example to have meals with the family at the weekend. Late night moves for example are not possible at classical chess. - You limited the number of your games on the site to a reasonable amount throughout the championship. Do you think nonetheless that cc is addictive? Does it affect your daily life? x: Yes! Limiting the number of my games is essential to try to have games of quality not quantity. Having a lot of games going at the same time is something very difficult to handle. It is perhaps the key to my victory against Figlio - I looked at his games - he had not less than 80 games going on at ICCF this must have affected the amount of time he could spend analysing his 8 games at FICGS. The effects on daily life are felt by the family because the reality is if I spend more time analysing the games I spend less time with the family. Thats difficult for me. But when the results come I dont regret it! - What do you think of the role of chess engines (Rybka Fritz etc)in cc. What are for you the important skills of a cc player - to supplement the machine? x: Chess engines are used in cc by 95% of players. You have to adapt yourself and know how to use the engines. To play just the best move of Rybka 3 Fritz 12 or Hiracs 12 without thinking leads to a draw if your opponent does the same or to a loss if your opponent is thinking. You have to choose bewteen 4 or 5 moves with a similer evaluation from the engine during a game and sometimes the best move is not among these. - You play Big chess. Interest or curiosity? What do you think of this strange version of chess? X : Curiosity and amusement and I think Rrybka 3 cannot yet play Big Chess! This version is new and I did not know it and the inventor has done a good job! By the way I would like to ask is it possible to castle at Big Chess? [No its not possible] - Finally the question that everyone is asking particularly Francois and Wolfgang who are contesting the 2nd candidates final. Do think you will be able to defend your title next year? :) x: Definitely I will defend the title I would like to know if possible the date and time limits for the match. I wish Francois and Wolfgang a great match! I would also like to express my appreciation for this tournament which has been well organised! - the match should start in the first week in January next year the time limit will be 30 days plus 1 day per move. Thank you for your answers and once again congratulations on a great performance. x: Thank you. Cheers. Best wishes to everyone and good games!


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-08-19 02:16:39)
Its a win !!!!

You must be joking!! Thibault its a definite win it will be over in a few moves!! If anyone thinks black can survive please suggest some moves. The key to the win is that the best black can do is reach the position in a) below with Bishop and 2 pawns v R and 1 pawn. White wins becuse his king has access to e4, the Bishop is restricted by his pawns on a7 and e5 and most importantly his passed a pawn is not advanced. It has been completely lost since move 63 ...Kxf4 Janos should have taken with the pawn 63..exf4 would have allowed him to reach a table base draw. On 66 Kd3 I had the win completely worked out and have been replying instantly since then. Adjudicating this is a draw is just plain wrong. Anyone who spends time on this position will see the win I have outlined and that there is no defence. The winning method is to force an exchange of rooks by Rc4-g4 with mating threats against the Black king - black cannot allow this and must play Rd4 allowing exchange of a pair rooks when the resulting R+P v B+P+P is won. Before playing Rc4 white checks with the other rook to cut off the f file. The only way to avoid the rook exchange is to allow the white King access to e4 - at the moment the black rook cuts off d3 and the bishop if it goes to b6 will cut off e3. If the king gets to e4 either the e5 pawn drops or the king gets to d5 and e6 either result is fatal Here are the main lines: a) 72..Bb6 73 Rg8+ Kf5 (73..Kh5 74 Rc1 Rd4 75 Rh1+ wins the rook) 74 Rf8+ Kg5 75 Rc4! Rd4 (see below a1 for 75..Bd4)76 Rxd4! exd4 77 Kd3 (This ending is completely won the white king penetrates through e4, the black bishop is useless - remove pawn at d4 and its a table base win) Here are the main lines 77... Bc5 78 Rc8 Bb6 79 Ke4 Kf6 80 f4 Kf7 81 f5 Kf6 82 Rc2 Kf7 83 Ke5 a5 84 Rc6 Bd8 85 Bc7+ Kxd4 Table base win Or 77 ...Kg6 78 Ke4 Kg7 79 Rc8 Kf6 80 f4 (if the pawn on d4 falls eg 80 ..Ba5 81 Kxd4 its a table base win) Ke7 81 f5 Kf6 82 Rc2 Ke7 (82 ..d3 83 Rc6+ Kg5 84 Rg6+ and Kxd3 = TB win) 83 Ke5 Kf7 84 Rb2 d3 85 f6 with a simple win a1)..75..Bd4 (instead of Rd4) 76 Kd3 Ba1+ 77 Ke4 Ra5 78 Rg8+ Kf6 79 Rc6+ Kf7 80 Rgc8 Ra4+ 81 Rc4 Rxc4+ (black cannot avoid exchanging) 82 Rxc4+ and this ending like the one above is completely won. eg 82... Ke6 (82...a5 83 Rc5 a4 84 Ra5 x a4 = TB win) 83 Rc6+ Kd7 84 Kd5 Bd4 85 Rh6 a5 (any Bishop moves loses a pawn = TB win) 86 Rh7+ Kd8 87 f4 x e5 = TB win b) If the Bishop does not go to b6 the white king gets via e3 to e4 and then penetrates through the white squares d5 and e6 and its over. Sample lines: b1) 72 ..Kf4/f5 73 Rf8+ Kg6 74 Ke3 Rd1 75 Ke4 Re1+ 76 Kd5 Be7 77 Re8 Bf6 78 Ke6 e4 79 Rc5+ and the bishop is lost b2) 72..Ba5 73 Ke3 Rb5 74 Rg8+ Kf5 75 Rf8+ Kg5 76 Ke4 Rb4+ 77 Kxe5 with a simple win b3)72 ..Rd7 73 Rxe5+ (take a pair of rooks off = TB win) Kf4 74 Rcc5 Rg7 75 Re4+ Kg3 76 Rc1 Bb6 77 Rh1 a5 78 Rhh4 - Reg4+ exchanges rooks = TB win


Ilmars Cirulis    (2008-08-21 13:05:12)
sorry, Normajean...

I am in team "Dead LG, good LG". :D

I entered into that thematic only to found someone who will draw with black (in long time control).
For fun too, of course. :)


Ilmars Cirulis    (2008-08-22 15:41:19)
Another idea

... is to make two teams - defenders and refuters. :)

(I don't like to play LG with black.)


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-08-22 17:50:17)
Team challenge : Latvian gambit

Based upon an idea by Ilmars, let's try to create a special Latvian thematic tournament that could start at the beginning of september, consisting in two teams : Latvian gambit "defenders" and latvian gambit "refuters" (that will play either Black or White), this could be interesting to improve the theory in this opening.

Any player who wishes to play this tournament may post in this thread "I am in as White (or Black)" and I'll make pairings in a few days/weeks.


Ilmars Cirulis    (2008-08-22 18:59:56)
WikiChess

I'm tired. Imho I completed to input almost all my "theory" of Poisoned Pawn Variation.

Imho, after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4 fxe4 4.Nxe5 Qg5 5.d4 Qxg2 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Bf7+ Kd8 8.Bxg6 Qxh1+ 9.Ke2 both black moves - 9.-- Qxc1 and 9.-- c6 are lost for black.

Corrections and improvements are welcomed! :)


Normajean Yates    (2008-08-25 11:44:44)
I am in as defender (black)

I am in as black.


Rodolfo d Ettorre    (2008-08-25 12:09:56)
Me defender too!

Darkness vs Light, I am black!


Normajean Yates    (2008-08-27 04:49:14)
unofficially...

I said i am in as black, but so far it is unofficially. If I am too overloaded -- chess [here and elsewhere] is already taking up too much of my time, and chess is not life, not for me, so I will have to think before officially entering.


Ilmars Cirulis    (2008-09-04 09:18:56)
Evans Gambit in Wikichess

I have suggestion to make some progress in Wikichess with Evans Gambit.

Maybe we can start with article #3617?! Compromised defence is my favourite. I take black. Who want to take white? :)


Peter Unger    (2008-09-08 00:54:05)
a game ended with mate

my Game vs. Sharma ended with Mate. Why isn't it finished? And tournament-table isn't adapted?! Here is the game: [Event "FICGS__CHESS__WCH_STAGE_1_GROUP_04__000005"] [Site "FICGS"] [Date "2008.07.08"] [Round "1"] [White "Sharma,Kirti"] [Black "Unger,Peter"] [Result "*"] [WhiteElo "1365"] [BlackElo "2187"] 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. c3 Nf6 4. Qc2 Qc7 5. Be2 e5 6. O-O Be7 7. Na3 O-O 8. Nc4 Be6 9. Ng5 Bd7 10. Ne3 h6 11. Nf3 Be6 12. c4 b6 13. Nd5 Qb7 14. Qd3 a5 15. a4 Nc6 16. Qc2 Nb4 17. Nxb4 axb4 18. d3 Nd7 19. b3 Nb8 20. h3 Nc6 21. Qd1 f5 22. Nd2 fxe4 23. dxe4 Nd4 24. Bg4 Bxg4 25. Qxg4 Bg5 26. Rb1 Rf6 27. h4 Rf4 28. Qd1 Rxh4 29. g3 Bxd2 30. Bxd2 Qxe4 31. gxh4 Ne2+ 32. Kh2 Qxh4+ 33. Kg2 Qg4+ 34. Kh2 Rf8 35. f3 Qg3+ 36. Kh1 Qh3+ 37.* regards retep1


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-09-09 19:40:44)
Multi-site tournament

Hi all,

A multi-site tournament is being to be organized with 4 chess websites (not using real names), each player from each team playing 1 game with Black "at home" and 1 game with White in his opponent's home with 1 opponent of each website (3 in total, hope I'm clear), so 6 games in total.

2 websites in the competition are :

http://www.echecsemail.com
http://www.echeconline.net


6 games (3 games here and 3 games played on 3 other websites) seem a lot though, what do you think ?


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-09-15 20:54:47)
Wikichess : Update !

Now you can see strong improvements in Wikichess articles :

- Opening ECO code
- Name of the opening
- Moves played at FICGS
- Find games played at FICGS
- Statistics (White wins, Black wins, Draws)...

Thanks to report any bug.


Ilmars Cirulis    (2008-09-16 10:57:07)
bug?

http://ficgs.com/wikichess_685.html

Nc3 : 2 games, White ELO av : 1526, Black ELO av : 1816
1-0 : 0% , 1/2-1/2 : 0% , 0-1 : 50%


Don Groves    (2008-09-20 05:03:31)
MoGo

Hi, Andrew -- It would be an amazing feat if MoGo programmers could eliminate its nine-stone handicap in only one year of development. With each stone eliminated, the combinatorial aspects increase exponentially and the human advantage in pattern recognition and game understanding increases in proportion.

FYI - In a handicap game, the weaker player always goes first (ie., plays black). The handicap stones are placed on predetermined points and that constitutes black's first turn. White plays next and they alternate the remainder of the game. Komi still applies unless otherwise agreed.


Michael Aigner    (2008-09-23 14:38:05)
Oh my god!

Oh my god, is this opening bad! I knew the lavtian gambit ist not really a sound opening joice but I never realized how bad it is. Good luck to the Blacks - we will need it ;-) Michael


Iouri Basiliev    (2008-09-23 15:07:07)
Michael Aigner

It is bad. From the beginning blacks is really worse and hardly faiting for the draw. Imho collapse will come around move 20.


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-09-24 16:03:18)
Latvian meatballs

With best play black gets into an ending and trys to grovel his way to a draw a pawn down. The main line runs: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.Nc4 fxe4 5.Nc3 Qf7 6 e3 c6 7.d3 exd3 8.Bxd3 d5 9.O-O I think any deviations from this by black give an even worse game At this point Black can try 9...Bc5 then 10 b4! Bd6 (10..Bxc4 11 Ncxd5 is crushing)11 Re1 Ne7 12 Nexd5 cxd5 13 Nb5 Bxb4 (0-0 14 Nxd6) 14 Bd2 0-0 15 Bxb4 and the d5 pawn will drop leaving white as usual a pawn up for nothing 9...Bd6 10 Re1 Ne7 11 Nexd5 cxd5 12 Nb5 0-0 13 Nxd6 Qxf2+ 14 Kh1 Nbc6 (14 ..Bg4 15 Qd2 Qh4 16 b4 is great for white)15 Rf1 Bg4 16 Bxh7+ Kh8 17 Rxf2 Bxd1 18 Be3 d4 19 Rxf8+ Rxf8 20 Bg1 Kxh7 21 Rxd1 leaving the usual technically lost ending for black!!


Iouri Basiliev    (2008-09-25 11:58:00)
Andrew Stephenson

Hey Andrew, why You don't playing in the match black or white? For me 4.d4 is the best whites move. Developing, space, defence - all in one :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-10-02 11:50:49)
Game 16370, towards a new rule ?

What do you think about this case :

http://www.ficgs.com/game_16370.html


Last move : Qe4+ 2008 September 30 19:57:40

White clock - 94 days 18:34:55 (58 days 08:20:25)
Black clock - 0 day 01:19:54

[Event "FICGS__CHESS__CLASS_A__000032"]
[Site "FICGS"]
[Date "2007.11.30"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Koch,Christian"]
[Black "Stephenson,Andrew"]
[Result "*"]
[WhiteElo "2140"]
[BlackElo "2104"]

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Be3 e5 7.Nb3 Be6 8.h3 Be7 9.Qf3 O-O 10.O-O-O b5 11.g4 b4 12.Nd5 Nxd5 13.exd5 Bc8 14.Kb1 Nd7 15.Qe2 Bb7 16.f4 Qc7 17.fxe5 Nxe5 18.Qf2 Bd8 19.Bg2 a5 20.Nd4 a4 21.Rhe1 a3 22.b3 Ra5 23.Nf5 g6 24.Nh6+ Kg7 25.Qf4 Bxd5 26.Bxd5 Rxd5 27.Qxb4 Qc6 28.Rxd5 Qxd5 29.Qf4 f6 30.Bc1 Qc5 31.Rd1 Ba5 32.Qe4 Rc8 33.c4 Bb4 34.h4 Qc6 35.Rd5 Re8 36.Qf4 Bc5 37.Bd2 Qb7 38.Bc3 Bb4 39.g5 f5 40.Qd2 Bxc3 41.Qxc3 Kf8 42.Kc1 Qb6 43.c5 Qc6 44.Rxd6 Qh1+ 45.Kc2 Qe4+ 46.Kc1 Qh1+ 47.Kc2 Qe4+ 48.*


So here player Black has good chances to lose the game on time, even if the best thing player White can do is to draw the game. In my opinion, "in general" player Black should play his next move, unless an analysis prove that the game is a forced draw - according to the rules, http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html#adjudications - and eventually the result will be corrected after the game, but I'd like to know what other players think about this situation in general...

Thanks for helping to build strong rules.


Michael Aigner    (2008-10-02 13:15:00)
No draw

Hello Thibault, my opinion is, we do not have a forced draw in this position. White can easily avaoid it (propably by loosing the game but this does not matter). Time is part of the game, it is the same in OTB chess. So three possibilitys are popping up. No1. The game is going on, just like normal. No2. White offers a draw and hopes his opponent is accepting it (it is of course fully acceptable when black keeps playing). No3. Black offers an draw because he is convinced the position is a draw and he did not want to play for time. Best regards Michael


Iouri Basiliev    (2008-10-06 12:30:18)
Latvian gambit

My first two games with Michael and Rodolfo simply confirmed - "LG is bad opening". 15-20 moves and black can resign. I choose 3.Nxe5 as most difficult for black. 3.Bc4 has been played with Denis. Do not expect more than 20 moves here as well.


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-10-14 22:01:56)
exchange slav

Difficult to know what Kramnik was up to in this game. 8 Qb3 has been regarded as pretty harmless and is not much played at GM level - he must have had some new idea - apparently 15 Qxb7 is new but black was always going to get the pawn back. After 6 months preperation and 3 full time seconds a bit strange! I am sure Anand will go full power for the point tomorrow - I still cannot quite believe that Kramnik will play the Petroff he avoided it against Kasparov and I am sure he will avoid it in this match also.


Denis Ivanchenkov    (2008-10-20 22:58:43)
Iouri Basiliev

ok. Definitely I will NOT play Latvian gambit for blacks any more!


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-10-21 02:49:33)
Game 5

Wow, Anand is now leading 3.5 - 1.5 after only 5 games and 2 wins with the Black pieces, a real surprise...

GM Kramnik (2772) - GM Anand (2783) [D49]
WCh Bonn GER (5), 20.10.2008

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 e6 5.e3 Nbd7 6.Bd3 dxc4 7.Bxc4 b5 8.Bd3 a6 9.e4 c5 10.e5 cxd4 11.Nxb5 axb5 12.exf6 gxf6 13.0-0 Qb6 14.Qe2 Bb7 15.Bxb5 Rg8 16.Bf4 Bd6 17.Bg3 f5 18.Rfc1 f4 19.Bh4 Be7 20.a4 Bxh4 21.Nxh4 Ke7 22.Ra3 Rac8 23.Rxc8 Rxc8 24.Ra1 Qc5 25.Qg4 Qe5 26.Nf3 Qf6 27.Re1 Rc5 28.b4 Rc3 29.Nxd4 Qxd4 30.Rd1 Nf6 31.Rxd4 Nxg4 32.Rd7+ Kf6 33.Rxb7 Rc1+ 34.Bf1 Ne3 35.fxe3 fxe3 0-1


Ilmars Cirulis    (2008-10-23 18:54:26)
... brr

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4 fxe4 4.Nxe5 d5 5.Qh5+ g6 6.Nxg6 hxg6 7.Qxh8 Kf7 8.Qd4 Be6 9.Be2 Nc6 10.Qe3 Nh6 11.d3 Nf5 12.Qg5 Nfd4
(13.Bd1 exd3 =)
13.Qxd8 Rxd8 14.Bd1 exd3 15.cxd3 Bf5
(15.-- Nb4? 16.Bg5 and 17.Kd2 +/=)
16.Bg5 Re8+ 17.Kd2 Ne6 18.h4
(18.Be3 Ne5 19.Bb3 Rd8 20.d4 Nc4+ 21.Bxc4 dxc4 22.Nc3 Nxd4 23.Rad1 Nc2+ 24.Kc1 Re8 25.Bg5 Nb4 26.Rd4 Nd3+ 27.Kd2 b5 =)
18.-- Ne5 19.Nc3 d4 20.Ne4
(20.Nd5 c6 =)
20.-- Nxd3 21.f3
(21.Nf6 Bb4+ 22.Ke2 Nxg5+ 23.Nxe8 Ne6 24.Nxc7 Nxc7 25.Bb3+ Kf6 26.Rhd1
(26.Rad1 Ne6 27.Bxe6 Nf4+ 28.Kf3 Nxe6 29.a3 Bf8 =)
26.-- Ne6 27.Bxe6 Nf4+ 28.Kf3 Nxe6 29.a3 Bd6 =)
21.-- Nxb2 22.Bb3 b5 23.Rhc1 c5 24.Rab1 Bxe4 25.fxe4 c4 26.Rxb2
(26.Rf1+ Kg8 27.Bxb2 Nc5 28.e5 Ne4+ 29.Kd1 Nc3+ 30.Kc2 Ba3 31.Rf4
(31.Re1 Nd5 32.Bxc4 bxc4 33.Rb7 Rf8 =)
31.-- Bxb2 32.Kxb2 cxb3 imho =)
c3+ 27.Kd3!
(27.Kc2 cxb2 28.Rf1+ Kg7 29.Bf6+ Kh7 30.Kxb2 Nc5 31.e5
(31.Bxd4 Nxb3 32.Kxb3 Rxe4 33.Rxf8 Rxd4 =)
31.-- Bg7 32.Kc2 d3+ =)
27.-- cxb2 28.Rf1+ Kg7 29.Bf6+ Kh7 30.Bxe6 Rxe6 31.Bxd4 Ra6 or 31.-- Kh5 (Unclear for me, but imho black can draw at least in one of them) =

I will check it one more time. But it looks that black can fight for draw after <<1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4 fxe4 4.Nxe5 d5 5.Qh5+ g6 6.Nxg6 hxg6 7.Qxh8 Kf7 8.Qd4 Be6 9.Be2 Nc6 10.Qe3 Nh6 11.d3 Nf5 12.Qg5>> too.


Normajean Yates    (2008-10-24 15:28:48)
in a while is right...

The new theory that has come up has to be looked at seriously first... only one draw so far, rest all are white wins!

I wonder if black managed to win or has chances in any game in the iccf latvian tourney that llmars is playing in...


Ilmars Cirulis    (2008-10-24 15:51:19)
To Normajean

It's because ICCF - in one game I am so far with black: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4 fxe4 4.Nxe5 d5 5.Qh5+ g6 6.Nxg6 hxg6 7.Qxh8 Kf7 8.Qd4 Be6 9.Be2 Nc6 10.Qe3 Nh6 11.d3 Nf5 12.Qd2 Ncd4 13.Nc3 Qh4

I don't care about chessopedia. If you are busy, you can do it even in the next year. It was more for fun.
I was (and am) too lazy to put it in WikiChess, it's all.


Michael Aigner    (2008-10-24 19:38:43)
The only draw wa a lucky one!

Unfortunately I have to say that my draw against Ilmars was lucky becaus he mixed two moves. Until that White was clearly better. I played my games without any information about the openeing theory of the lavtian gambit - only brief analysis. Now I can say this is not enough to defend this opening. On the other hand there might be ways to survive with black if one knows ideas, plans, opening theory .... Is there any good book with more or less reliable analysis of this opening? Next time better opening preparation is definately needed ;-)


Normajean Yates    (2008-10-26 00:13:03)
Aigner, the book is *here*!

Book for latvian? it seems they get outdated nowadays before they get published.. there is Kosten's book, ECO, ..., etc. Good to have them at hand, but it looks like all the lines have got outdated! Best is to search internet - and look at posts specially llmars's posts - here..

Interesting, your draw -- so the only way to draw with black against llmars in the latvian gambit is - no preparation! :)


Ilmars Cirulis    (2008-10-26 09:31:03)
More

http://www.jeremysilman.com/chess_opng_anlys/040410_latvian_gambit.html
http://www.jeremysilman.com/chess_opng_anlys/040703_anthr_olk_atth_ltvn_gmbt.html
http://www.jeremysilman.com/chess_opng_anlys/040801_two_wild_black_systems.html
http://www.jeremysilman.com/chess_letters/040223_splat_the_lat.html (!)
http://www.jeremysilman.com//chess_opng_anlys/040223_more_splat_the_lat.html (!)


Normajean Yates    (2008-10-26 20:06:26)
i disagree...

I disagree :) I mean - i dont know your OTB interest and it is not relevant - but even if we assume for the sake of argument that a superGM might defeat you 10-0 OTB with latvian as black , then that will be because of tactical complications they can create, NOT because of mastery over latvian [ok the two are connected.. they can *see* more of what can be extracted out of things...

Even if we assume above (purely for argumnt's sake) you are at least some kind of authority on authorities ;) [i mean you gave so many links...]
,br> Not really. I have a low opinion of Silman's books :( ;)


Iouri Basiliev    (2008-10-29 14:36:03)
Latvian gambit

Latvian Gambit is bad opening for blacks: e4 e5 Nf3 f5?? is Kings Gambit(KG) (trans)position with extra tempo for white. KG is not playable at high level due to white can achieve draw at maximum. Extra tempo gives whites at LG anormous advantage in comparison with KG. Whatever "theory" is talking about. Sorry.


Normajean Yates    (2008-10-31 03:38:44)
similarly,smallest natural *extension*-

similarly, what is the *smallest* natural *extension* of chess? [Again I am reposting this idea - i did it a few months ago]

Think about it this way, as far as way of moving is concerned, [keeping aside pawns for the moment] you have R, B, N moving in essentially different ways. Q = R + B as far as movement is concerned - i.e. a queen can move like a rook or like a bishop, as the player chooses. The movement of the Q is nothing more and nothing less.

So, to extend chess minimally and naturally [therefore extending the symmetry also] IMO the natural choice of new pice would be a piece which I call the superqueen, lets call it U [because S is knight in chess problems and in many non-english roman-script languages..]. The superqueen U moves like a R, a B, or a N, according to mover's choice. In other words, it moves like a Q or a N.

movewise, U = R + B + N = Q + N.

Now keeping symmetry and minimality in mind we get 10x10 chess with the following starting position:

rnbqukqbnr/pppppppppp/10/10/10/10/10/10/PPPPPPPPPP/RNBQUKQBNR.

In 10x10 castling O-O and O-O-O, it may be more natural for the king to move *three* squares [and the R crosses the king and goes adjacent to the new position of the king, just like in 8x8 chess.]

Actually long ago (1981-82) we tried this 10x10 a few times with some friends - we used to call *this* 10x10 thing 'big chess' :(

[we used a one-pound coin heads-up and tails-up for white and black superqueen resp.]

But the name bigchess is taken [and bigchess is nice :) ] , so I am just calling it 10x10 chess now..


Normajean Yates    (2008-11-01 00:04:35)
on 5x5 chess experience from wikipedia

the english wikipedia minichess article says that Martin Gardner's 5x5 chess was played by correspondence in italy [doesnt say how many games, players played it, and during which period] - results:
* White won in 40% of games.
* Black won in 28%.
* Draw was in 32%.


Normajean Yates    (2008-11-03 05:43:35)
vacation bug?

I have gone on vacation, but in Game 21702 it is opponent's move - and opponent's clock is still moving!:

Normajean Yates ... is in vacation until 2008 November 7

White clock - 98 days 01:11:33
Black clock - 94 days 15:34:05 (59 days 23:22:32)


and now:

Normajean Yates ... is in vacation until 2008 November 7

White clock - 98 days 01:11:33
Black clock - 94 days 15:32:46 (59 days 23:21:13)


So opponent's clock has decreased from 94 days 15:34:05 to 94 days 15:32:46 !


Ben Milton    (2008-11-07 19:38:27)
Thank you

Thank you for the helpful reply, however when i try 2200+ for black and white and type Sicilian. it says no games...


Normajean Yates    (2008-11-07 20:36:31)
but I found lots, + wait for hashtables

but Mr Milton, *I* found loads of 2200+ v 2200+ sicilian games!

Hashtables haven't been implemented yet, but thibault said they are soon to come. so will not yet, but soon in the future, find transpositions into a sicilian, and at present but not in the near future you *will* find games that transposed *out* of sicilian...

What *did* you search for? In 'Opening' type 1.e4 d5, and for both black and white elo type 2200 - and you will get the sicilians, with the provisos I mentioned above


Wolfgang Utesch    (2008-11-30 11:43:57)
Is Marshall attack ....

... good enough for a win on high level correspondence chess??? You can make your own mind with a look at 4 games of WCH_CANDIDATES_FINAL_000002 (# 23018, 23019, 23020, 23021) where Black played an unusual defence which could have fundamental importance of judgement this opening!


Wolfgang Utesch    (2008-11-30 18:48:14)
Caire - Utesch

Thibault, in accordance to your rules I have to avoid any loss in all games of the match. So I decided to play defences with Black where the risk is lower, because general endgame ideas are more important than tactical play with many figures.


Hannes Rada    (2008-11-30 20:20:20)
Good for white !?

Currently I am playing with white a decisive game at the Austria championship against the Marshall 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.O-O Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 O-O 8.c3 d5 9.exd5 Nxd5 10.Nxe5 Nxe5 11.Rxe5 c6 12.d4 Bd6 13.Re1 Qh4 14.g3 Qh3 15.Re4 g5 16.Qf1 Qh5 17.Nd2 Bf5 18.f3 Nf6 19.Qg2 Nxe4 20.Nxe4 Qg6 21.g4 Bxe4 22.fxe4 Rae8 23.Bc2 Qh6 24.e5 Bxe5 25.dxe5 Rxe5 26.Bd2 Qe6 27.Bb3 Qe7 28.Qf2 c5 29.Re1 c4 30.Rxe5 Qxe5 31.Bd1 h6 32.Qe3 Re8 33.Qxe5 Rxe5 34.Bf3 f5 35.gxf5 Rxf5 36.Bb7 * The endgame 2 bishops vs 1 Rook + Pawn looks good for white. Black did not have any attacking changes in this game and white quite a comfortable game. However I am not quite sure if white can win it.


Hannes Rada    (2008-11-30 21:43:01)
Attack ?

You are right Wolfang. But I thought, that you played these so called attack for winning purposes :-) If black want's or must win, I think that Sicilian gives better chances.


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-12-01 08:15:20)
Marshall to win..

At cc no real chance for a black win but not easy for white to get much chance either. Although I dont know if many cc players want to go through the extended end game suffering Wolfgang seems to enjoy :)15...a5!? looks like a simpler less masochistic way to get the draw rather than Wolfgangs 15...Rae8 Still why Caire plays exactly the same variation of the Marshall in all 4 white games????? - against a higher rated opponent it makes no match sense at all. I suppose your not going to lose games on time playing the same variation:):)


Marc Lacrosse    (2008-12-01 08:45:01)
To Andrew

"(...)why Caire plays exactly the same variation of the Marshall in all 4 white games????? - against a higher rated opponent it makes no match sense at all. I suppose your not going to lose games on time playing the same variation:)"

Hi Andrew in my FICGS__CHESS__WCH_QUARTER_FINAL_3__000005 playing the exact same variation in my four black games was the key to win the match: all four were drawn whereas I managed to win 3.5/4 in my four white games (with four variations of one of these silly sideline sicilians you seem not to praise too much).

... what is the optimal strategy for these matches remains to be determined. The "all-draws-favors-higher-rating" rule is very interesting. I like it very much.

Marc


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-12-01 15:34:03)
cant argue...

..with your results Marc. However the current champion won FICGS with exactly the strategy I favour and exactly the opposite to your strategy. So thats powerful evidence in favour of the varying openings approach. Well done on winning your match - lets see how far you get with your strategy. As for these side line sicilians I never called them silly Marc your being over sensitive. I thought that it was easy to equalise against them and get a draw at cc. I still believe that and proved it in our game. However I do think your opponent (as black) was playing ambitiously to win! Now thats a different story .....


Andrew Stephenson    (2008-12-01 15:37:40)
cant argue...

..with your results Marc. However the current champion won FICGS with exactly the strategy I favour and exactly the opposite to your strategy. So thats powerful evidence in favour of the varying openings approach. Well done on winning your match - lets see how far you get with your strategy. As for these side line sicilians I never called them silly Marc your being over sensitive. I thought that it was easy to equalise against them and get a draw at cc. I still believe that and proved it in our game. However I do think your opponent (as black) was playing ambitiously to win! Now thats a different story .....


Ilmars Cirulis    (2008-12-04 16:59:57)
More...

http://ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=wikichess&article=2910

Qd6 : 7 games, White ELO av : 1680, Black ELO av : 1752
1-0 : 28.6% , 1/2-1/2 : 0% , 0-1 : 0%


Wolfgang Utesch    (2008-12-07 04:31:26)
Strange ....

Black is better, but I cannot see any decisive advantage!


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-12-10 18:39:52)
FICGS for mobile phone !

FICGS is now available with a slight interface for mobile phone (that can connect to internet, ie. Iphone, Google Phone, Blackberry, Samsung player...)

You may try it there :

http://www.ficgs.com/mobile.html


Feel free to make any suggestion to improve it.

Thanks to Hervé for his help :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2008-12-13 23:42:25)
FICGS poker holdem championship

The waiting list for the 1st FICGS poker holdem championship is open, as all ratings are not established, the rating limit has been changed to 1600.

Only the 9 highest rated players at the beginning of the tournament (february 1, 2009) will play it, consequently the best way to improve your rating before the deadline is probably to play POKER HOLDEM BULLET BRONZE games (you may use the challenge function in My games).

The current rules :

"FICGS world poker holdem championship is a 2 stages tournament. First stage is a single round-robin tournament, involving the 9 highest rated players who entered the waiting list. The winner of this tournament is the challenger for FICGS world champion title. In case of equality, the player with the strongest tournament entry rating (TER) is qualified for the next stage. If tournament entry ratings are equal, ratings when the next stage begins will be taken in account. If current world champion defends his title, he will play a 5 games match (3 games with White, 2 games with Black) against his challenger.

All games are played in 30 days + 1 day / move. Rules for poker holdem are official rules. You may find more information about the FICGS betting structure in FICGS rules. Both players must play until one resign or game is adjudicated. One game is played in 3 winning rounds of 100 chips by player played in no limit mode. The minimal bet is always 1 chip and does not depend on the blind's value. The small blind's value is doubled after the 50th hand, then after the 70th, 80th, 90th and 100th hand (the big blind then is 64 chips) of each round."


Ilmars Cirulis    (2008-12-16 11:17:57)
Foll pos

1.Nc6 Nf3 2.Nb4 Ne5 3.b8Q

Interesting... Do you agree to play with black (just one demonstration game in forum posts)? :)


Normajean Yates    (2008-12-16 15:47:26)
llmars I agree to play as black, ok.

But I am going home on yearend vacation (and also chess vacation!) I am posting and old rebel10 v rebel10 game in the next post.


Normajean Yates    (2008-12-16 20:17:42)
oh sorry, it is obviously impossible!

Since no captures have been made, the pawns could not have legally crossed each other. you cannot even have a white pawn on e5 and a black pawn on e4 if no captures have been made.

Since the position is unreachable, it must be considered a chess variant, not a 'thematic'.


Normajean Yates    (2008-12-17 18:05:42)
anyway, about the 16-queens mate-in-4:

Svante Carl von Erichsen showed it was possible to solve without computer help:

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=problem_read&id=311

As for proof game, The foll is from my rec.games.chess.analysis post [it *was* .analysis I think - feeling too tired to search usenet]

" This one is mine:

1. 4k3/qqqqqqqq/8/8/8/8/QQQQQQQQ/4K3 w - - 0 109: [pos. 1]

White to play and mate in 4.

There are no duals - only one moves mates in 4. [there is no mate in 3 or less.]

Move given at end of post, with sample continuation.

These two were posed by me and solved by likesforests [see fics (www.freechess.org) or chess.com] in 20 minutes total!

2. Give a proof game for pos. 1, ie Show that the position in prob. 1 is legally reachable by giving a game that leads to the position.

3. Okay, so you can reach a position where you have 16 queens on board. Can you construct a game which reaches a position with 18 queens? If so, do so! [the last part carries 99% of the credit - it is to pre-empt the answers "yes" and "no".

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(note: these can be more conveniently viewed at chess.com in the thread "advantage of moving first - mate in 4 in symmetrical position" in the forum-category "more puzzles")

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Solution to 2: by likesforests

[Event ]
[Site ]
[Date ..]
[White likesforests]
[Black likesforests]
[Result 1-0]
1. a4 b5 2. a5 b4 3. a6 Bb7 4. axb7 Nc6 5. Na3 bxa3 6. b8=Q a2 7. Rb1 a1=Q 8. Qb3 Qa6 9. Qa2 Qb7 10. b4 a5 11. b5 a4 12. b6 Qa6 13. b7 a3 14. Qb3 a2 15. b8=Q a1=Q 16. Qh3 Q1a5 17. Qbb3 Ne5 18. Qbg3 c5 19. Rb3 c4 20. c3 cxb3 21. c4 b2 22. c5 b1=Q 23. c6 Qba2 24. c7 Qb8 25. Bb2 f6 26. Bc3 Kf7 27. c8=Q d5 28. Qc4 Nc6 29. Qch4 d4 30. d3 dxc3 31. d4 c2+ 32. Qd2 Ra7 33. f3 Q5a4 34. Kf2 c1=Q 35. d5 Qca3 36. d6 e5 37. e4 Nge7 38. d7 Kg8 39. d8=Q Qa8 40. Qb6 Nb4 41. Qbe3 Nbd5 42. exd5 e4 43. Ne2 f5 44. Qeh6 f4 45. Kg1 e3 46. Nd4 e2 47. d6 e1=Q 48. d7 Qea1 49. d8=Q Nd5 50. Nc2 Nc3 51. Ne3 fxe3 52. Qdg5 e2 53. Qdf4 e1=Q 54. Qfg4 Qeb1 55. f4 g6 56. Qc5 g5 57. f5 Bg7 58. Qgc4+ Rf7 59. f6 Bf8 60. Q5b4 g4 61. Qe5 g3 62. Qe1 Ne4 63. Qcb3 Nd2 64. Qhc4 Nf3+ 65. gxf3 g2 66. Be2 Bg7 67. Kf2 Bf8 68. Ke3 g1=Q+ 69. Kf4 Qgb6 70. Qcc3 Be7 71. Kg4 Qe6+ 72. Kg3 Rf8 73. fxe7 Rf7 74. e8=Q+ Rf8 75. Qeb5 Qf7 76. f4 Re8 77. f5 Re6 78. fxe6 Qff8 79. e7+ Qf7 80. Rf1 Qaf8 81. e8=Q Qa8 82. Qbb2 Q4a7 83. Qed2 Q3a6 84. Rf3 Q8b7 85. Qcc2 Qac4 86. Q4b3 Qad6+ 87. Kg2 Qdc7 88. Q3a2 Qce6 89. Qhe3 Qed7 90. Q8e4 Q8e7 91. Qb2b3 Qag7+ 92. Qg3 Qbb2 93. Bc4 Qbf6 94. Kf1 h5 95. Rf5 Qfxf5+ 96. Ke1 Rh6 97. Qxh6 Qfh7 98. Qhxh5 Qfxc4 99. Qee2 Qcf7 100. Qbb2 Kf8 101. Qgf2 Ke8 102. h4 Kf8 103. Qhg4 Qhxh4 104. Qgg2 Qhh7 105. Qbh5 Ke8 106. Qhh2 Qfe6 107. Qff3 Q6f6 108. Qff2 Qff7 1-0

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

solution to 3: by likesforests

Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[White "likesforests"]
[Black "likesforests"]
[Result "1-0"]
1. a4 b5 2. a5 b4 3. a6 Bb7 4. axb7 Nc6 5. Na3 bxa3 6. b8=Q a2 7. Rb1 a1=Q 8. Qb3 Qa6 9. Qa2 Qb7 10. b4 a5 11. b5 a4 12. b6 Qa6 13. b7 a3 14. Qb3 a2 15. b8=Q a1=Q 16. Qh3 Q1a5 17. Qbb3 Ne5 18. Qbg3 c5 19. Rb3 c4 20. c3 cxb3 21. c4 b2 22. c5 b1=Q 23. c6 Qba2 24. c7 Qb8 25. Bb2 f6 26. Bc3 Kf7 27. c8=Q d5 28. Qc4 Nc6 29. Qch4 d4 30. d3 dxc3 31. d4 c2+ 32. Qd2 Ra7 33. f3 Q5a4 34. Kf2 c1=Q 35. d5 Qca3 36. d6 e5 37. e4 Nge7 38. d7 Kg8 39. d8=Q Qa8 40. Qb6 Nb4 41. Qbe3 Nbd5 42. exd5 e4 43. Ne2 f5 44. Qeh6 f4 45. Kg1 e3 46. Nd4 e2 47. d6 e1=Q 48. d7 Qea1 49. d8=Q Nd5 50. Nc2 Nc3 51. Ne3 fxe3 52. Qdg5 e2 53. Qdf4 e1=Q 54. Qfg4 Qeb1 55. f4 g6 56. Qc5 g5 57. f5 Bg7 58. Qgc4+ Rf7 59. f6 Bf8 60. Q5b4 g4 61. Qe5 g3 62. Qe1 Ne4 63. Qcb3 Nd2 64. Qhc4 Nf3+ 65. gxf3 g2 66. Be2 Bg7 67. Kf2 Bf8 68. Ke3 g1=Q+ 69. Kf4 Qgb6 70. Qcc3 Be7 71. Kg4 Qe6+ 72. Kg3 Rf8 73. fxe7 Rf7 74. e8=Q+ Rf8 75. Qeb5 Qf7 76. f4 Re8 77. f5 Re6 78. fxe6 Qff8 79. e7+ Qf7 80. Rf1 Qaf8 81. e8=Q Qa8 82. Qhc1 ( 82. Qbb2 Q4a7 83. Qed2 Q3a6 84. Rf3 Q8b7 85. Qcc2 Qac4 86. Q4b3 Qad6+ 87. Kg2 Qdc7 88. Q3a2 Qce6 89. Qhe3 Qed7 90. Q8e4 Q8e7 91. Qb2b3 Qag7+ 92. Qg3 Qbb2 93. Bc4 Qbf6 94. Kf1 h5 95. Rf5 Qfxf5+ 96. Ke1 Rh6 97. Qxh6 Qfh7 98. Qhxh5 Qfxc4 99. Qee2 Qcf7 100. Qbb2 Kf8 101. Qgf2 Ke8 102. h4 Kf8 103. Qhg4 Qhxh4 104. Qgg2 Qhh7 105. Qbh5 Ke8 106. Qhh2 Qfe6 107. Qff3 Q6f6 108. Qff2 Qff7 ) h5 83. Qhc8 h4+ 84. Kg4 h3 85. Bf3 Rh5 86. Bg2 hxg2 87. h3 Rh4+ 88. Kxh4 g1=Q 89. Rf6 Qga7 90. Qec6 Q8b8 91. Q8a6 Q8e7 92. Kg4 Kf8 93. h4 Qbe8 94. Rd6 Qg8+ 95. Kf3 Qbg6 96. h5 Q6g7 97. h6 Qad7 98. h7 Qa5 99. h8=Q Qdxd6 1-0

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

solution to 1: 1. Qaxf7+!

Sample continuations:
1... Kd8 2. Qexe7+ Kc8 3. Qdxd7+ Kb8 4. Qdd8#
1... Qxf7 2. Qh8+ Qxh8 3. Qxh8+ Qf8 4. Qfxf8#

"


Hannes Rada    (2008-12-25 21:12:07)
Game 1

looked very promising for White. Without deeper looking into the position I thought that white is going to win here. But than I found that black has perpetual check due to his pair of rooks. With only 1 rook on booth side, i think white should win. Wolfang, have you analysed a possible exchange of rooks at move no. 51 51. Rb7 instead of 51. a4 ? I did not analyse this position, but at first sight this seems to be a good chance for winning this game. Can you comment this ?


Ben Milton    (2009-01-05 16:00:41)
CHALLENGE!!!

I hereby challenge all to 2 games one as black and one as white, to whoever believes they can beat Rybka 3 using tuned Perfect 15 book and depth 23 after opening. This is ofcourse to win my E-points. Any one interested at all?


Normajean Yates    (2009-01-12 12:51:48)
oops soory i only got the joke now :)

excuse: I was multitasking!

rephrasing the question:

does llmars think all white gambits are 0-1 - including queens - and all black gambits (e.g. latvian, traxler, albin, falkbeer) are 1-0?


Normajean Yates    (2009-01-19 15:38:51)
to sophie [contd]..

Sophie wrote: 'the halloween gambit refused is a dull game.'

Programs cannot understand the concept 'dull' and 'interesting'.

(actually they *can* very roughly, but then they cannot distinguish efficiently between 'interesting' and 'unsound'. Something like: run the position on rybka3 'dynamic'; then cross-check the move with the main rybka3 )

They can understand 'drawish'.

Objectively of couse, either the initial pos is a win for white, or a win for black, or a draw. We simply do not know...


Philip Roe    (2009-02-20 14:36:04)
Complexity of Go

Don, I think the extra complexity may be more than your calculation shows.

On a Go board with 39 extra points, I think you are assuming that each extra point could be occupied by either a white stone or a black stone, giving 2 to the power 39 extra possibilities. Actually, since the extra stones need to be equally of each color, the possibilities are not quite so great. (about 2 to the power 36)

Anyway, what that calculation gives is the number of additional POSITIONS, but in calculating the number of additional GAMES the order of playing the stones must matter. On a board with n points, the number of possible games seems to be just factorial(n). In that case, going from a 19 x 19 board to a 20 x 20 board increases the number of possible games by a factor factorial(400)/factorial(361), which my computer gives as about 2 to the power 334.

I don't know enough about Go to judge how significant these numbers are, and surely various heuristics will cut them down a lot. But I thought that this observation might be worth making.


Don Groves    (2009-02-21 00:30:03)
Thanks...

... for the correction, Philip!

Another thing I wonder is if we should give each point three states: black, white, or empty. This would increase the complexity even further but I'm not certain if it is a correct thing to do.


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-02-25 14:52:12)
Risky opening

The games played with Black by Tomas Civin are worth a glance, nice to see this opening at this level (quite hard to play for sure)

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=29043

Maybe a thematic tournament to follow :)


Hannes Rada    (2009-02-25 19:48:47)
GM Suba

GM Suba said to this kind of position: Black is better, because he can improve his position. White cannot, because he has already the best possible position :-)


Sebastian Boehme    (2009-02-25 23:06:06)
Very nice alternative

The Modern Defense is a very nice way to avoid playing always e4 c5 as black

One famous person, I forgot his name, once said about life in general: "Variety is the spice of life."

So why not some variety also amongst the chess top levels! ;-)


Don Groves    (2009-02-26 01:47:00)
Modern/Hippo

I've played the Modern, also known as the Hippopotamus because it lies low in the water, waiting for its prey to make a mistake.

I have both won and been smothered with it. Black must strike quickly, at exactly the right time and place, or die a horrible death ;-)


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-02-28 03:35:14)
Svante Carl wins FICGS Go WCH (again)

Congratulations to Svante Carl von Erichsen who keeps the FICGS Go champion title by beating Ke Lu 5d on an impressive 5-0 score, also reaching a rating of 2653 !

A rematch just started between our two top Go players, as Ke Lu convincingly won the 3rd FICGS Go WCH preliminary tournament by 7/7

You can follow the games here :

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__GO__WORLD_CHAMPIONSHIP__000003

Svante Carl kindly accepted to answer a few questions on his match :


FICGS - Hello Svante Carl, first of all congratulations for your win in the FICGS correspondence Go championship final. Your opponent was Ke Lu 5 dan, you won 4 games out of 5 already (the last game is not finished yet), how do you explain such a result?

Svante Carl - Hello! Thank you very much! It is certainly astonishing for me that I was able to hold my own in these games. I believe that the main factor that helped me in getting on even terms with such a strong player was that I could spend much more time analyzing each move than in a face-to-face or online direct playing situation.

FICGS - Did you have a particular preparation or plan before to start the games?

Svante Carl - The only things I planned beforehand was to really give my best, and to make the games as distinct as possible.

FICGS - The site will now try to attract more correspondence Go players from Asia (with a few chinese, japanese or korean words on the home page already), what do you think about the games format played at FICGS (30 days + 1 day / move, chinese rules komi 7.5 points) and the championship rules?

Svante Carl - I like the format. I am also interested in the rules of Go as well as the rules that surround Go, like tournament rules and time settings. My current conviction is that the "real, pure" Go rules are area rules with superko, and territory rules should be seen as a shortcut which should give the same result. I have come to think that the "Taiwan rule", i.e. White gets a point of compensation if Black got the last play (before the first pass), is a sensible part of the rules. FICGS has taken a very easy route by declaring the rule set and leaving negotiation of the result to the players. While in the end, it is only important who won, I think that showing a result as e.g. "White+3", "Black+Resign" adds a lot of flavour. As a time system, I think that bonus time (a.k.a. Fischer time), like on FICGS, is a very general and sensible approach to timing a game like Go. I think that many "real-world" tournaments and internet servers will switch to that in the future, for all, blitz, speed, normal, slow, and correspondence games. The championship format is quite nice. I like the title holder/challenger way of tournament series. The only thing I would like to see is some sort of nigiri to determine the colours in the odd game. Attracting players from Asia is really a worthwhile goal. I look forward to playing players from all over the world.

FICGS - Does correspondence Go bring you something more than real time Go? What is more addictive according to you?

Svante Carl - Since I think that analyzing is a forte of mine, I might be a bit stronger at correspondence Go than at "real time" Go. I don't think that one is more addictive than the other.

FICGS - Do you often play real time Go online? What servers do you prefer?

Svante Carl - I usually play on KGS, but not too much, perhaps one or two games per week on average, often in "bursts". KGS is quite nice, but not perfect. Sometimes I play at CyberOro, but there is much less communication; I like to watch pro games there.

FICGS - Do you use softwares that assist you in your games (FICGS rules allow this)? What do you think about computer Go in general nowadays?

Svante Carl - I only use a board or a simple SGF file viewer for analyzing. There are no playing programs that could help me. The programs have advanced quite much recently, but I think that it will still be a long time before they can beat me in an even game. Currently, most tests of these programs are against professional players with high handicaps, and I think that this is a good situation for the bots, since they get exponentially weaker the further the game is from the end -- high handicap practically eliminates the opening, their weakest spot. I would like to see more tests against amateur players at the bots' own level.

FICGS - Do you play other games (board games, video games...), what is your favourite one?

Svante Carl - Go is certainly my absolute favourite. I also know chess, although I am really weak at that. I also like "german board games", there are some really nice pearls there. In video games, well, there are also some pearls, but they get drowned by a mass of ... not so good games..., I don't waste time looking at that scene any more. I also played some online poker, but it wasn't able to keep me interested.

FICGS - Will you defend your title again against Ke Lu who also won the 3rd wch tournament?

Svante Carl - Of course, I am looking forward to that!

FICGS - Could you give us your impressions on the games, how it went from the beginning to the end, do you think that time pressure were a non-negligible factor in the result (the clocks of Ke Lu were quickly near 1 or 2 days left)?

Svante Carl - I was a bit surprised that he let his time drop to such a low level right at the beginning, perhaps he was not familiar yet with the vacancy feature at FICGS. I can't see his reasons for this, or how much time he actually could spend on his games. I was ahead in each game when it timed out, though.

I think that game 2 was quite even from the start. The skirmish in the lower left resulted in me capturing a little group, but he got a nice framework on the lower side. My prospects of reducing this were a bit hampered by the fact that my right side group was not completely settled. I found a way to sacrifice some stones to settle my group while fixing the framework's extent and keeping sente to secure my top side, at which time, the game was still almost even, but I think that I was a few points ahead then. Later, I could seal the top side with some extra points through some rather blunt forcing moves.

In game 3, my opponent made an approach with White 24 that is usually regarded as bad in this situation, because the pincer Black 25 works out very well in conjunction with the stone on the left side. He tried to settle with White 26, but I refused to make things so easy, even though the result from the usual joseki would not have been bad. He resisted Black 27, but I think that White 28 is an overplay. The resulting fight left me with nice profit in that corner and sente, while he made some centre thickness. I then tried to carefully neutralize this thickness, but I may have played some slack moves in the course. Later, I was able to keep a little moyo in the lower right centre, and then I poked into his right-side territory where he had left a serious weakness earlier.

Game 1 started out with an interesting fight in the upper right. After White 42, both the three captured black and the two almost captured white stones retain some serious aji, which I came back to fix on my side a few moves later. When I could set up a splitting attack with Black 77, he was able to connect his two weak groups, but in bad shape. I continued to keep this dragon separated from the top, planning to invade the top side afterwards. However, with White 110, instead of connecting by playing B6, he saved some centre stones, and I proceeded to separate and kill the dragon. He may have overlooked that my upper left side group was still able to live after 110 and 111.

In game 4, after White 22, Black's stones on the left side have a strange relation. The three stones in the corner are a bit far from C10, but putting another move here is way too slow. He tried to remedy this situation with the following moves. After Black 27, there are weaknesses left in both sides' shape. When I entered with White 32, I thought that his weakness at F13 would let me settle easily, but he attacked very hard. After White 60, there are some weaknesses in my shape, but he also has a weakish group in the centre. Playing at K10 with White 76 before taking the two stones with H2 felt very important to me. At move 94, I couldn't find a good move to complete my moyo at the top, but I thought that I had found a good point to invade. This was much harder than I thought, since after Black 95, the 3-3 point fails to live. With 96 and 98, I thought that I would get a ko, but he played a line that I had excluded earlier on account of too many cuts in Black's outside shape. However, with Black 107, he made things very difficult for me, since cutting at P16 doesn't work out too well -- my inside group doesn't have enough liberties. I cut at Q14 instead with the hope to at least get some outside forcing opportunities that might have been able to keep me in the game. I think that Black 115 should have been at R12, because after White 116, R12 and N16 have become miai. Black 117 just doesn't work at all. I really got lucky in the end here. These impressions are naturally one-sided, and I would be really interested what stronger players might say about these games.

FICGS - Thank you very much and have good games !

Svante Carl - Thank you!


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-03-15 15:07:07)
Wch 4 round-robin final started !

Finally, the WCH 4 round-robin final tournament started (game 22898 is a win for White). Initially, only 5 players qualified, meaning 2 games with White and 2 games with Black. I was thinking about a future rule to make double round-robin tournaments in this case but I thought it was more interesting to invite 2 players in this particular case due to the results of Alberto and Jason.


Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff    (2009-03-22 17:58:25)
Captured pieces

Hello Samy,

to know which pieces are captured in your games you can write it into the personal messages of the games:

White: 2B, 2N, 3P
Black: Q,4R

and so on. I think it is a good solution without changing the software.


Denis Ivanchenkov    (2009-03-22 23:28:11)
captured pieces

Thibault, maybe it is just my personal drawbacks but when I set up board I usually look at captured pieces (on letsplaychess.com or chess-online.ru) and see how many of pieces are out - and just count with those on the board to be 16 in total - and become confident that I didn't miss anything. here on Ficgs it usually takes more time to get confident that all pieces on their places. and from the other side it will be easily seeing which player is getting upper hand - just looking at captured pieces (especially when difference is small - like pawn or two or pawn for a piece) and yes notation White: 2B, 2N, 3P Black: Q,4R would solve the problem


Normajean Yates    (2009-04-15 13:34:38)
shortest possible bigchess checkmates?

Experienced bigchess players please respond!

What are the shortest checkmates in bigchess, for white and for black (e.g. in 'normal' 8x8 chess they are the "fool's mates" - 3 moves = 5 half-moves for white; 2 moves = 4-half-moves for black..)

So which are the bigchess "fool's mates" (shortest mates)?


William Taylor    (2009-04-15 15:24:11)
shortest possible bigchess checkmates

I like the 13 half-move mate where black pushes an edge pawn or something while white hops his knight all the way over to l15. :) May have a lookk for other ones later.


Normajean Yates    (2009-04-15 21:22:03)
11 half-moves: decent uper bound..

Thanks for the posts so far - So, we made progress (in the pure math sense) - we have a 'small enough' upper bound now - 11 half-moves for white, so by symmetry 12 (or 10?) half moves for black...

I can't say 12 or 10 (above) because I havent though about the answer at all - the question came to mind; I posted it; went to sleep... will think later..


Normajean Yates    (2009-04-26 18:11:42)
I think Thib's IS the shortest...

To spell it out, white moves Nh2-j4-h6-j8-h10-j12, while black helps by g15-g14,Nj15-h13-g15,Ng16-j15, (and one irrelevant move e.g. moving an edge pawn). That is 5 moves ['half-moves'] by each side, and the 11th half-move is white's Nj12xh14 mate (the black K is smothered and the h14-pawn is unprotected).

You need five [half-]moves for a N to reach the opposite king; so: black can mate white (helpmate ie white co-operates) in 10 half-moves.


Normajean Yates    (2009-04-28 12:25:12)
PhilipRoe+SophieLeClerc - wonderful!

PhilipRoe+SophieLeClerc (Sophie should get joint credit I think because she first posted in 'international chat' (2009-04-16 08:31:15-25) that a Q+N mate would be even shorter) - that's wonderful - congratulations!

But Sophie had posted that 'it can be done in 8 half-moves with the Q and N' (she didn't give the line). Philip's line, if reversed so that *black* checkmates white, will need 10 half-moves because the mating side in this process needs to free the f-Bishop, free the Q, move the f-bishop once and move the Q twice - a total of 5 [half-]moves. So if black mates by Roe's method it on black's 5th move - which means 10 half-moves.

So, is there a shorter way [specially, with *black* mating]?

Waiting for more posts..


Sophie Leclerc    (2009-05-01 01:23:07)
Thanks

While I thanks for the credits, I'll tell you that I am not a woman, ( why i have that name, you doN,t want to know kay. I got a wrong name, but I like it. )

I saw to real way for black to check mate white. But to get a queen take the weak pawn. And white does it faster.

1 e4 j13 2.Ba6 h14 3. Nh4 m14 4. Qk3 Bm15 5. Qxk5 mate. was the lines I poster in the internationnal chat. ( I am not a girl. )


Normajean Yates    (2009-05-01 04:06:00)
sorry+thanks Sophie - but: its still 9..

but it is still 9 [half-]moves because the mate is on white's 5th move, so 5 white-moves + 4 black-moves, = 9 [half-]moves.

If you see, yours and Philip's solutions are essentially minor variants of each other...

In Sophie's solution, 2..h14 is of couse an easily repaired mistype [2..h14 is not possible, you see]- one can just replace it by say 2..a14.


Normajean Yates    (2009-05-11 02:07:31)
thoughts on Big Chess... and tips...

I find bigchess more and more fascinating.. I Think it is a wonderful creation of Thibault's (I presume it is Thib. who created it: any way he offers it seriously on this site...) - the starting position is very well-concieved..

I think Bigchess needs more publicity. This is about the only place one can play it - and here there are 2-3 top-class players; less than 20 middle-standard players (including me); others try it once or twice and for some reason get scared or overwhelmed and give up - I see no reason why..

Bigchess gives no advantage on account of huge memorisation of theory, or of better engines: there are *no* theory books; and there are no known engines in existence (probably there isnt one - too little demand, and writing a *good* engine is somewhat laborious, coming up with a *good* static-eval function is tricky, fast board-implementation issues...), so it is all wits...

In fact last week I spend part of two days writing down whatever theory I could discover [with help from top games], it comes to half a page..



Tips for people who want to try bigchess:

1. Bishops are much more powerful than Knights. (because of much longer range compared to 8x8 chess).

The consensus on the values of bigchess pieces is David Grosdemange's valuation:

pawn=1
knight=2.5 (written 2,5 in the continent, of course)
bishop=4
rook=6
queen=11


2. In the opening position, the c,f,L and o-pawns are unprotected.

So, if white's opening move is with the j2-Knight ( freeing the queen), then on move 2 white can move the Queen and threaten to pick up a pawn by forks.. Similarly for black.

*However*, such pawn gambits are quite playable because the Queen can be forced to make many moves to capture a pawn, while the gambitting side develops their pieces.



3. Most Important For Many People: board for offline analysis.

Best of course, is to take time to draw a 16x16 board on paper and stick it on cardboard. And get hold of four sets of chess pieces.

Another way: print a position, and after a move is made - just update the position using correction fluid (typewriter/printer-ink erasing fluid) or something. That way you don't have to keep printng a lot of positions.


Sophie Leclerc    (2009-05-11 23:36:33)
Names

All goes with the thème.

If we can call ourselves, the dragonriders, Assuming we play the sicilian dragon.
the phantoms, If we defend yugi's new opening, f4 c4 Nc3 Nf3, in any order. This name would give us more then invisbility, it tell our opponent that we will survive (you can't kill a ghost.)

Gambit lover, if we love to play gambit, it would suit us very well.

chess angels, if we are not too guilty, that would suit us, but I am very guilty....

Pterodactyl guild, if we play the system with white and black ( for black, c5, g6, Bg7, Qa5. Black radical way to prevent d4. You can't say they are not original.


Your choice.


Normajean Yates    (2009-05-12 00:47:43)
more bigchess thoughts..

compared to 8x8 chess, bigchess has twice the number of men but four-times the number of squares. Hence, initial and average board-population density is half that of 8x8chess. So, games are more commonly 'open' - games as closed as an 8x8-chess closed game will be comparatively rare.

Hence, also, (because of low population-density) long-range pieces Rook, Bishop and Queen are *in general* -- Thib., agreed: only 'in general' :) --- much more powerful than their 8x8-chess counterparts.

However, the queen can still get trapped early - see my game number 31191 - opp resigned on my [black's] 7th move because of trapped Queen..
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=31191&flip=1


Sophie Leclerc    (2009-05-14 03:09:09)
To give it up.

Game 28299 looked fantastique for black, I don't believe he should lose here.



I find it terrible to give up when you have great game to play. The game did not looked to violent, but why in hell someone would like to give up, when he does not a disavantage. Black looks okay.

it is a shame. Why we can't see the end of it.


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-05-23 00:31:31)
1st team tournament : games & results !

A new thread to comment the games & results in the 1st FICGS team tournament that just started ! The teams are :

>> The knights who say "Ni"

Michael Aigner - 2602
Xavier Pichelin - 2577
Hannes Rada - 2559
Thibault de Vassal - 2473

>> FSF En Passant

Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff (2270)
Volker Koslowski (2264)
Sebastian Boehme (2175)
Roland Markus (2096)

>> The Dark Knights

William Taylor - 2140
Scott Nichols - 2089
Don Groves - 1991
Josef Riha - 1989

>> Happy Pawn

Stephane Legrand 2209
Garvin Gray 2125
Daniel Parmet 1961
Ilmar Cirulis 1805

>> Yellow-Blue Warriors

Iouri Basiliev
Dmytro Romaniuk
Ostap Hladky
Yura Lemehov

>> The Ghost Knights

Vadim Khachaturov
Yugi Inving
Sophie Leclerc
Jorge Orden

>> The Knights with no name (yet)

Alexander Blinchevsky
Stanimir Denchev
Benjamin Block
Ranganathan Raman


You can follow the games here :

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__CHESS__TEAM_EVENT_TABLE_1__000001
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__CHESS__TEAM_EVENT_TABLE_2__000001
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__CHESS__TEAM_EVENT_TABLE_3__000001
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__CHESS__TEAM_EVENT_TABLE_4__000001


Note : The first player displayed in each tournament table is not always the player of the first team because when the 1st & 3rd players of a team play White against another team, the 2nd & 4th play Black against the same team, this is not obvious to read (sorry).

I'm really sorry to the 2 players that were not included in a team, but we had to start the tournament now... The last team may still announce their name (provisional : "The knights with no name")

Have nice games :)


Sophie Leclerc    (2009-06-02 22:41:49)
deceptions

ho well, some deception there.

I was waiting for a bloodpathj in romaniuk-Inving, right away, but black did not accept, such sadness.


Benjamin Block    (2009-06-03 18:10:25)
Chess will die in corr first.

Chess is still possible to win in corr even if it is more harder. But computer is still bad. In a some possitions computers think that white is better even if black is on win.


Sophie Leclerc    (2009-06-09 22:56:31)
the opening

actually, I did not, Yugi played that system to me to me with black piece and I let him build a big pawn,, it was too late for me.

This opening is the same thing as his but with one extra tempo..

White can go in a number of way..
I am waiting to see plenty of thingss, will you play a bird or an enlish ?

Thanks thibeault


Sophie Leclerc    (2009-06-16 19:40:04)
hyper-modern

That strange opening just look too-hyper modern, biside controlling the center fromthe flank,, what will white do if black has no center.


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-06-22 16:41:00)
Discussion at Rybkachess

That's an interesting discussion... Once more, the confusion reigns between Freestyle chess (commonly played at classical & blitz time controls) and Correspondence Chess, particularly for centaur players who did not experience correspondence chess at a 2500+ level.

IMO (in brief) on several points :

1) All these made-for-engines books have no other interest than to "manipulate" chess engines & other made-for-engines books, actually this has almost nothing to do with correspondence chess (where they are completely useless at a high level, let's say 2300+) or even chess.

2) Many players do not realize the multitude of factors that appear to be more important that the basic strength of centaurs once the correspondence chess 2400 mark is reached and that still increases at 2500 and 2600... The higher the level, the more "opening books" depend on the recent games played by the opponent (and his level), the number of current games played, the score to reach in 8 games matches, the importance of rating, the goal in life, even the month/season for a few players and many other things according to the persons... Actually these "openings books" just live the time to use it one time, so a better term is preparation, actually opening books do not exist anymore in correspondence chess at a very high level, at most it may be useful against weaker players.

3) The previous point is enough to explain the rating changes of most 2400+ players ! In example...

- GM Farit Balabaev is a very experienced player who constantly has(had) more than 100 running correspondence chess games at several places for years, he's also a fast player, it is quite logical to me that he looks for quiet games and fast draws (or lose sometimes to very strong players who want to win more)

- Wolfgang Utesch, FICGS WCH finalist, like many players at one time in their life, decided that other things were more important and that correspondence chess was too time consuming, particularly once the 2500 mark has been reached...

- Eros Riccio obviously decided to win every correspondence chess competition at FICGS while playing a high number of games at several places AFTER having topped the FICGS rating list with the highest rating so far (which he did), so it is natural to look for a few quick draws in matches if 8 draws mean a victory for him (and a few rating points lost, that is quite inhuman anyway :))

- Michael Aigner tops most FICGS rating lists by playing only games at 40 days + 40 days / 10 moves time control, which is an enormous performance as obviously the longer the time control, the higher the rate of draws. I do not know how many current games he's playing at ICCF or IECG and other organisations but I suspect he plays a quite reasonable number of games.

- Xavier Pichelin may top the FICGS rating list this year as he's an incredibly dangerous player with White and Black and with a reasonable number of running games.

Many strong players also choose to play some tournaments for "fun" or to experiment openings and may lose some points while their real strength is over 2500 or more... so it is quite hard to make the difference between the real strength and correspondence chess ratings. So many parameters... It is likely that we'll see one day a 12 games match between Eros and Xavier (Michael do not play fast correspondence chess time control, yet I hope), we all wonder what rating could achieve Vasik Rajlich (Rybka's creator) and other very strong freestyle players but it is very hard to predict only by knowing their results in freestyle tournaments. Correspondence chess is a mirror of real life.


Ulrich Imbeck    (2009-06-23 14:55:27)
GO: Game 32800

In Game 32800 (GO) black, a DAN-player, began with 1.q15 d4 2.q5 d16 3.f3 c6 4.k4

1.q15 and 2.q5 can't be the best.

1.q16 and 2.q4 is risky enough.


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-06-23 17:00:16)
Strange Joseki

GoPosition (see diagram)

(reminder : see Help to know how to post a diagram)


Hi Ulrich, that's why I like Go :) .. It reminds me certain gambits in chess.. theorically inferior (actually I'm not even sure here) but if you don't know the lines, you're done !

Don Groves played this joseki against me a few weeks ago (games 30935 & 30934) for the first time, obviously it is very interesting against a player who did not experience it before... If White plays q3 or q17 after that (which I did), he may have no space enough quickly and Black may build big shapes. Well, I'm not strong enough to bring an interesting comment on this joseki anyway, maybe Mikhail can share some ideas on this :)


Alejandro Suarez-Moreno    (2009-06-24 00:43:28)
Strange joseki do it by a good player

Hi Ulrich and Thibault,
this joseki present a good problem. Black stones are ready to form a big shape on the right side and white have to decide "a fast fight for these corners or a strategical fight for zones of influence". I played many games with Don Groves and his style is strong. Maybe he is not dan player, but you'll have to fight very hard for the victory against him!
On the diagram I prefer 4...o16, or 4...r10. The invasion to back corner still remain possible and black attention have to put here during many plays.


Ulrich Imbeck    (2009-06-24 01:01:32)
Yes

Yes, 4...o16, or 4...r10

I thaught like Thibault did, q3 or q17, to fight in blacks backside


Alejandro Suarez-Moreno    (2009-06-24 23:18:06)
Strange Joseki

Hi Don, I accept your invitation to discuss the strategy over your joseki.

I don't like to invade suddenly the black corner. If we play q3 then you have to play very exactly. White stones are in dangerous and black can use it to gain influence toward the center and, in the same time, try to kill the white dragon. I remember the comentary of Thibault: "may have no space enough quickly" and I believe him!

But r10 try to avoid this situation and white can make a basis to attack the black shape on top board or fight in the center.

Maybe Ulrich and Thibault can tell us the strategy of play q3.


Ulrich Imbeck    (2009-07-24 22:26:05)
q3 against a large corner and the side

4. ...q3 or 4....q17, to fight in blacks backside, were only instinctive reactions of mine.

4. ...o16 or 4. ...r10 are very logical too.

If White don't invade the corner with q3, Black will achieve a large corner and that side.


Ulrich Imbeck    (2009-07-27 23:16:09)
p4 at move 13 looks easier

My p4 at move 12 tries to divide the black stones.

n5 at move 12 is more space orientated.

But why p5 at move 13?

p4 at move 13 looks easier.


Svante Carl von Erichsen    (2009-07-29 00:41:23)
Unusual doesn't mean bad

I think that this is a perfectly valid opening. There have been much stranger openings that have been played by professionals, even though they appear to be "obviously inferior to standard play" (which this opening does not, in my opinion). I'd like to hear a solid reasoning for the stament that Black's first two moves "can't be best".


Tano-Urayoan Russi Roman    (2009-08-05 18:13:29)
Another game




Michel van der Kemp    (2009-08-25 19:47:10)
Mistake in ELO calculation?

I got this email from an advanced match.

Game 27857


[Event "FICGS__CHESS__BULLET_BRONZE__000132"]
[Site "FICGS"]
[Date "2009.8.23"]
[Round "1"]
[White "van der Kemp,Michel"]
[Black "Goršek,Gregor"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteElo "1966"]
[BlackElo "1623"]

1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nc3 d6 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.Be2 O-O 6.O-O c6 7.a4 a5 8.h3 Na6 9.Be3 Nb4 10.Qd2 Qc7 11.Rac1 Rd8 12.Rfe1 d5 13.exd5 Nbxd5 14.Nxd5 Nxd5 15.Bh6 Be6 16.Bxg7 Kxg7 17.c4 Nb4 18.Bd3 Nxd3 19.Qxd3 Qd6 20.Re3 Rd7 21.Qe2 Re8 22.Rd1 R7d8 23.Re1 Rd7 24.b3 b6 25.Ng5 Bf5 26.g4 1-0



Move sent : 2009.8.23 - 17:54:11
Move replied : 2009.8.23 - 19:10:44


Player resigned.




WhiteELO : 1966 ... 1961
BlackELO : 1623 ... 1627


This email was generated automatically by http://www.ficgs.com/
My rating went down after winning a game :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-08-26 19:24:09)
do better next time :)

lol Garvin ! no he was probably right (because of the small advantage given to black), I corrected the advanced chess rating rules already.


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-09-24 01:00:06)
Games 1 & 2

What do you think about the final positions ?




Thibault de Vassal    (2009-09-24 14:13:33)
Karpov wins game 3

.. but he lost game 4, Kasparov leads 3-1




Thibault de Vassal    (2009-09-29 20:17:35)
Carlsen leads the Nanjing tournament

The Nanjing tournament starts quite well for Magnus Carlsen, who won his first game with the scotch opening against Peter Leko (maybe the influence of Garry Kasparov), and won his second game against Veselin Topalov !






Thibault de Vassal    (2009-10-01 18:54:07)
Carlsen beats Jakovenko

A third win (for 4 games) for Carlsen in the tournament !




Nick Burrows    (2009-10-09 20:09:13)
Game from today




Nick Burrows    (2009-10-09 20:12:28)
Another played this week




Lazaro Munoz    (2009-11-06 05:09:02)
Is Poker holdem a game of chance ?

The "luck" factor bears no part in the long run since good and bad hands will eventually equally one's "luck".

As a programmer myself I see hold'em poker as a state game as opposed to a stateless game such as roulette where the next roll is independent of the previous. The state is important in the past history of cards having been played. Of course too much knowledge of state in Blackjack will get you booted out of the casino :)

There are two sets of skills that a player possesses, probability and human nature assessment, it terms of detecting patterns of bluffing. In hold'em as opposed to other types of poker where there is less shared information, knowledge of probability becomes the more prominent skill as opposed to other types of blind pokers.

So "chance" is a part of the game but the open nature of hold'em brings more skill to table than other poker games.


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-11-07 02:28:21)
Najdorf vs. Petroff

When I have no time enough - that is quite often - I also tend to play Najdorf in all my games (white & black), as IMO it looks like more a perfect geometric shape (kind of spiral) that looks quite "simple" & that chess engines & humans 'generally' play quite well/logically. Also it gives more chances with both colors, particularly against a weaker opponent, as most pieces stay on the board while avoiding symetrical positions.

Finally the Sicilian Najdorf looks quite reassuring, that defines most often the human choice... I used to play many other openings more often, some are much more interesting in some ways with more psychological, strategic & tactical issues, but I must recognize that the more I play against or with engines, the more I play like them, particularly when I feel a general "zeitnot".


Michel van der Kemp    (2009-11-30 12:51:02)
Andersson

Didn't Ulf Andersson become ICCF World Champion? At least I remember a game where he beat then world champion Gert Timmerman (2200-2300 FIDE rating) with black. I know for a fact he was at one point the highest rated player in ICCF.


Thibault de Vassal    (2009-12-20 14:23:36)
Boris Spassky vs. Viktor Korchnoi

Entitled the "Battle of the Giants", a match just started in Elista (Kalmykia) between the 10th World Champion Boris Spassky (aged of 72), and Viktor Korchnoi (now aged of 78, multiple World Championship challenger mainly during the Karpov era, but still active in competitive play).

Korchnoi won the first game, game two ended in a draw. This kind of match is always a pleasure to follow for long time chess fans :)

Here is the first game !




Pablo Schmid    (2009-12-26 22:21:54)
Rating calculation

Hello Thibault, j'aurais préféré parler en français mais puisque je suis sur le forum...

Could you explain how exactly chess rating's calculation works in ficgs?

And I think games with 10 moves or less should be counted, maybe not every games but sometimes 8 or 9 moves can be sufficient to punish someone (nice miniatures or quick mates are possibles) and it enables the loser to resign (or be mated) without losing points. An example of an abusive situation: imagine I play the Traxler and I resign before 10 moves if I see a good choosed line by my opponent which I don't like to play as Black because I know I might suffer or even lose...

J'espère que je t'aurai convaincu et que mon exemple ne donnera pas de mauvaises idées! Sur ce, bonnes fêtes, Pablo


Kamesh Nookala    (2010-01-24 19:34:39)
Resign before 10th move

Hello HOST,

I didnt know about this forum earlier and posted in the International Chat. I am sorry for that stupid mistake of mine. But the problem which i faced now is this. There is a guy whom i defeated in all 4 meetings where i played vs. him. This poor guy found me yet again and having known by now that he cant beat me, he simply resigned. I have no grievance against him. But in my very first Rapid B tour here at ficgs, i got an advantage of +-1.00 (approx.) vs. a player who simply resigned after my white 10th move. This meant that though I am awarded with a win, yet because my opponent resigned simply instead of playing the 10th move, he denied me earning some elo. That also implies that he saved his elo by simply resigning.

I dont know much above this site as i am pretty new to this. However, i have been already a victim of this sort of activities. For e.g., I could simply resign when i play bad openings and evals dip before 10th move and i can simply save my elo. That means i can simply resign vs. Big Guys as Black and play as Black only vs. weak players.

Just thought to express my views. Rest upto the moderators


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-01-27 08:21:05)
Shirov-Carlsen

Here is the game by the way...




Thibault de Vassal    (2010-01-27 09:18:36)
Wijk aan Zee 2010

Finally, the tournament is now open again in Wijk aan Zee group A, after that Alexei Shirov won consecutively his first 5 games with a comfortable lead, Vladimir Kramnik finally catched him at 6.5/9 after a win over Magnus Carlsen with Black pieces.

Here is the game :



In group B, A. Giri leads by 6.5/9, in group C, Li Chao leads by 6.5/9 as well.


Lazaro Munoz    (2010-01-29 06:05:09)
Piece Values in Big Chess

I am amazed at the number of opponents that are still applying piece value from regular chess in big chess.

I made some regression analysis based on what we value in regular chess in terms of mobility and applied to big chess. Using the pawn and knight as the standard since in both games 3 pawns will probably beat a knight (if they are separated far enough). I assigned the pawn the value of 1 and and knight a value of 3 and extrapolated variables that we seem to use in valuing the other pieces such as number of squares it can reach, and penalty for being stuck on the same color.

I got the following values:

Pawn=1
Knight=3
Bishop=7 **
Rook=9
Queen=16

** The bishop value changes by pairs available, for example 4 white square bishops don't even come close to value 2 white squares and 2 black squares bishops so this is best value but it can go down to 6 or even 5 as pairs are lost.

Interesting, just like in chess a rook+bishop almost equals a queen and two rooks beat a queen. And a queen equals the value of the pawns (ok similar).

I still find opponents who exchange bishops for knights with impunity, not knowing the true values of the pieces.

I notice that nobody has ever mentioned this. I hope I did not give out some deep secret.

Of course you mileage may vary.

--laz


Don Groves    (2010-01-30 05:08:14)
Quote festival, part 6

Chess can only be "solved" by discovering a line that leads to a win by black or a draw by white from the first move. Hopefully, this will never happen.


Lazaro Munoz    (2010-01-31 11:54:48)
SuperGMs watch Corr?!

The Vidalina-Kabachev games goes:

[Event "WC-2006-F-00005"]
[Site "LSS"]
[Date "2007.9.12"]
[Round ""]
[White "Vidalina, Franjo"]
[Black "Kabachev, Andrey"]
[Result "0-1"]
[Eco ""]
[Annotator ""]
[Source ""]

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 6.Ndb5 d6 7.Bg5 a6 8.Na3 b5 9.Bxf6 gxf6 10.Nd5 Bg7 11.Bd3 Ne7 12.Nxe7 Qxe7 13.c4 f5 14.O-O O-O 15.Qh5 Rb8 16.exf5 e4 17.Rae1 Bb7 18.Qg4 Rfe8 19.cxb5 d5 20.bxa6 Bc6 21.b3 Kh8 22.Nc2 Bc3 23.Be2 Qf6 24.Rd1 Rg8 25.Qf4 d4 26.Bc4 d3 27.Ne1 Be5 28.Qe3 Rg5 29.g3 Rxf5 30.Ng2 Rg8 31.Rc1 Bd4 32.Qd2 Rf3 33.Rce1 Rgxg3 0-1

Interestingly Shirov played 23. Qh3 in his game. Rybka thought the move absolutely sucked and would have responded with the material grab: 23...Bxe1 24. Rxe1 Qc5 25. Bf1 Qxc2 giving it +0.11. It thought that white was much better before 23. Qh3 with the simple 23. Be2 (as was played by Vidalina).

Vidalina may have resigned prematurely since after 34. hxg3 Rxg3 35. Re3, Black is better and has some attacking chances there does not seem to be knock-out move.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-02-03 16:52:19)
Huang Xiangren 4p vs Lin Shengxian 7p

The first black moves looks very interesting and indeed it rotates... I feel I'm not strong enough to start to understand this.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-02-03 16:59:57)
Go chinese rules : should pass count?

Thanks again Svante Carl, these pages are really interesting to read. There are so many rulesets for Go... I'm not sure to understand everything though.

I can't understand why, in a deterministic game such as Go where Black always plays the first move, there should be an extra half-point or full-point for White if he plays last or not, the same for any pass stone, so in my opinion the way games are scored here shouldn't change, but I'm not sure if something should be added in the rules. Do you think that something like "pass stones are not counted" would be useful & clear enough ?

Any opinion ?


Ilmars Cirulis    (2010-02-19 19:49:44)
Curious opening

cxb4: 15 games, White ELO av: 1752, Black ELO av: 1832
1-0 : 50%, 1/2-1/2 : 0%, 0-1 : 50%


Ilmars Cirulis    (2010-02-19 19:50:51)
Curious opening

7.5 (!) games won by white
7.5 (!) games won by black

smth wrong


Michel van der Kemp    (2010-04-03 16:58:45)
Weird technical problem

Thibault, thanks for organising this nice tournament. Lot of fun. I lost my first game against Xavier Pichelin, which I will totally accept, Xavier played excellent. However I do have a weird question.

About the game I receive this email:

[Event "FICGS__CHESS__FREESTYLE_CUP__000002"]
[Site "FICGS"]
[Date "2010.4.3"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Pichelin,Xavier"]
[Black "van der Kemp,Michel"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteElo "2405"]
[BlackElo "1921"]

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.O-O Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 O-O 8.c3 d5 9.exd5 Nxd5 10.Nxe5 Nxe5 11.Rxe5 c6 12.d4 Bd6 13.Re1 Qh4 14.g3 Qh3 15.Be3 Bg4 16.Qd3 Rae8 17.Nd2 Re6 18.a4 Qh5 19.axb5 axb5 20.Qf1 Bh3 21.Bd1 Qf5 22.Qe2 c5 23.Nf3 Bf4 24.Qd2 Nxe3 25.fxe3 Bh6 26.Qf2 Rfe8 27.Bc2 Qh5 28.e4 Rf6 29.Bd1 Bg4 30.Rf1 g6 31.e5 Rf5 32.Ra5 cxd4 33.cxd4 Rc8 34.Ra3 Rc1 35.Qe2 Rb1 36.d5 Bh3 37.Qe4 Bxf1 38.Qxb1 Qh3 39.Qc2 Bc4 40.Be2 Rxf3 41.Rxf3 Bxd5 42.Bf1 Qg4 43.Rc3 Qd4+ 44.Qf2 Qxe5 45.Bg2 Bc4 46.Kh1 Bg5 47.h3 Kg7 48.Bf1 Bd5+ 49.Kh2 h5 50.Qe2 Qd6 51.Rd3 h4 52.Bg2 hxg3+ 53.Kh1 Bxg2+ 54.Kxg2 Qc6+ 55.Kxg3 Qc7+ 56.Kg2 Qc6+ 57.Rf3 f5 58.b3 Bf6 59.Qd3 1-0



Move sent : 2010.4.3 - 16:34:26
Move replied : 2010.4.3 - 16:34:55


Last move sent : g7-h7




WhiteELO : 2405 ... 2405
BlackELO : 1921 ... 1921


This email was generated automatically by http://www.ficgs.com/

It says last move send g7-h7. How did I actually lose this game if the server still received my move? The result of the game came as a little shock to me, because I thought I had about 10 seconds left when I send the move, and the server did receive it as well, and somehow registered it.

Anyway I should have been faster and accept my loss.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-04-05 00:58:06)
Advanced chess ratings calculation

For some reasons that I'll explain below, I updated the advanced chess (bullet, lightning, blitz, freestyle) rating calculation rules to the following :

"Performance = Opponent Current Rating if the game is drawn, + 350 if the game is won, -350 if the game is lost.

The following bonus / malus applied to White and to Black makes ratings fair, as it is not possible to force a player to take White or Black before a game :

(White) Performance = Performance - 50
(Black) Performance = Performance + 50

If there's a winner and if his rating is below 2400, his new rating his :

New Rating = ((8 x Current Rating) + (2 x Performance)) / 10

Otherwise :

New Rating = ((9 x Current Rating) + (1 x Performance)) / 10

The rating calculation does not take account of wins obtained by a stronger player when the Elo difference is greater than 350 points, the same with losses by a weaker player.

In case of a draw or loss against a player rated more than 200 points less, the opponent's rating considered in calculation is : Current Rating - 200. A player who wins a game cannot lose Elo points, a player who loses a game cannot win Elo points."

More details :

http://www.ficgs.com/membership.html#rating_advanced_chess


The rule that just changed is "If there's a winner and if his rating is below 2400, his new rating his : New Rating = ((8 x Current Rating) + (2 x Performance)) / 10".

This rule will probably be updated again in a few months with a rating limit of 2200 instead of 2400, when advanced chess ratings will be more coherent with correspondence chess ratings.

The reasons are :

1) Advanced/freestyle chess is often neglected partly because players will likely lose some rating points (many strong players using Rybka 3-like engines still have a rating of 1800 or 2000, there are several reasons to this), the main point is probably the interface but I'm fixing it (e.g. the new touch-move option - see Preferences).

2) Chess engines are just stronger and stronger while the ratings do not increase with the previous rules, as a consequence players who just tried advanced chess once years ago shouldn't still top the rating list. It is of course a way for players to find their place quicker in the rating list & to incitate players to play more games as well.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-04-10 21:19:28)
Challenges

This is the software's fault (my bad), not the player's... because there's a "challenge all players" function that is supposed to be used... so this is unlikely to be harrassment! Please keep cool in this case, you may move the challenges at the bottom of the window if you don't use it by clicking the arrow (towards the bottom). I'll add an option in Preferences to completely hide it, and probably a blacklist function also. Now working on.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-04-10 23:19:20)
Challenges hidden

New option for the challenges ! (see Preferences) .. now you can "hide" the challenges function. This means that a player still can challenge everyone (including you) but you won't see it. Not a perfect way but to be improved. There should be a blacklist function (during a session only) soon.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-04-17 16:35:57)
The 42106 case, strange poker bug

For my personal records (if it happens again), a one time bug happened in game 42106 for a completely unknown reason...

The moves : 1.fold 1 2.check - 3.check 1 4.1 - 5.check 1 6.1 - 7.check 20 8.fold - 9.fold 1 10.check - 11.check 1 12.1 - 13.check - 14.*

Actually player White played more than 4 moves in a row after 13.check, which is impossible in theory.

Even more strange, when I corrected the game & replayed the 13.check, it was Black's turn so everything ok.

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=42106


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-04-25 02:55:31)
Topalov wins Game 1




Thibault de Vassal    (2010-04-25 20:06:21)
Anand wins Game 2 ! 1-1




Thibault de Vassal    (2010-04-28 08:55:53)
Game 3 is a draw




Thibault de Vassal    (2010-04-28 21:22:41)
Game 4: Anand wins again

How to explain so many wins in this match? Let's hope it can continue like this as a way to promote chess as a still living & not drawish game. Do you think that the players took many risks so far? Nice game anyway.




Mircea Hrubaru    (2010-04-28 22:14:49)
Anand vs. Topalov, world championship

I think we should put aside the first game. In my view black played allright until the blunder 23...Kf7? which gave white the chance to blow away black's position with 23. Nxf6!! (Anand saw the pawn in f6 under the threat Nxf6 and that's why he defended with the king, but I think he didn't consider the immediate capture).
In games 2 and 4 Anand showed a superb preparation in an opening that haunts Topalov since his match against Kramnik. Game 2 showed a Topalov looking for deadly attacks and ignoring the lack of sufficient force in the attack. Until now the game with the highest quality is surely game 4, where 10. Na3!? caught Topalov offguard. Between them Anand showed in game 3 that he can chill out and play for safety.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-04-30 21:08:53)
Game 5, draw




Thibault de Vassal    (2010-05-02 16:17:36)
Game 6 draw, Anand still leads




Thibault de Vassal    (2010-05-03 23:33:36)
Game 7, draw again




Thibault de Vassal    (2010-05-05 15:41:56)
Topalov wins Game 8

Topalov strikes back in Game 8, now the score is 4-4, and as Mircea noticed it, the game follows a line until move 18 in another game played here "de Vassal vs. Leemans 1/2-1/2", I'm not sure if 18.a5 is a real improvement but it worked well against a world champion, at least!




Thibault de Vassal    (2010-05-08 20:50:45)
Games 9 & 10 ended in a draw






Thibault de Vassal    (2010-05-11 18:50:39)
Anand wins game 12 !

Quite a surprise to me, Anand beats Topalov with Black in the very last game... He is chess world champion again ! Congratulations to him!


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-05-11 19:13:45)
Anand is new world champion

30... f5 !




Thibault de Vassal    (2010-06-08 14:42:06)
Problème d'affichage

:-) Sorry, Vincent explained that he encountered a strange problem with his browsers, he cannot see the black knights on the chessboard that is not square anymore, probably due to the cache... but I'm not sure.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-06-28 20:44:06)
Encyclopedia of gambits

I guess that many of you read the interesting Chessbase article by Kavalek :

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=6460

The link to the encyclopedia of gambits by Marco Saba was a surprise to me... really interesting, and a huge work!

http://studimonetari.org/edg/

I picked up a few ideas for the next chess thematic tournaments, so there may be the next ones in the future :

Aasum [Van Geet: Hector Gambit] 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 de4 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.f3
Abonyi-Tennison [Reti: Tennison Gambit Accepted] 1.Nf3 d5 2.e4 de4 3.Ng5
[KGA: Allgaier Gambit] 1.e4 e5 2.f4 ef4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ng5 h6 6.Nf7
"Anti-Stonewall" [Dutch: Alapin] 1.d4 f5 2.Qd3 d5 3.g4
[Budapest: Alekhine, Balogh Gambit] 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 3.de5 Ng4 4.e4 d6
Banzai-Leong [French] 1.e4 e6 2.b4
Batavo [Bird: Batavo Gambit] 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 c5 3.e4
Beyer c.g. [Blackmar-Diemer: Beyer Countergambit] 1.e4 e5 2.d4 d5
Birmingham [Polish: Birmingham Gambit] 1.b4 c5
Blackburne - I [Scandinavian: 2.exd5] 1.e4 d5 2.ed5 c6
Böhnke [Scandinavian: Böhnke Gambit] 1.e4 d5 2.ed5 e5
Breyer [KGA: Breyer Gambit] 1.e4 e5 2.f4 ef4 3.Qf3
De Smet [Nimzowitsch Defence: 2.d4 e5 3.dxe5] 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 e5 3.de5 d6
[Diemer-Duhm Gambit (DDG) vs. Slav/Caro-Kann] 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.e4
Gaga [King's Gambit Accepted (KGA)] 1.e4 e5 2.f4 ef4 3.g3
Halasz - II [Sicilian: Halasz Gambit] 1.e4 c5 2.d4 cd4 3.f4
Hickmann [English: Anglo-Dutch] 1.c4 f5 2.e4 fe4 3.d3
Hjoerring c.g. [Benko Gambit] 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 b5 4.e4
Jerome [Giuoco Piano: Jerome Gambit] 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bf7
Krejcik [Dutch: Krejcik Gambit] 1.d4 f5 2.g4
Lasa [Open Game: Lopez/Mcleod, Lasa Gambit] 1.e4 e5 2.c3 f5
Lasker - III [Bird: From Gambit Accepted] 1.f4 e5 2.fe5 f6
Omega [Indian: Omega Gambit] 1.d4 Nf6 2.e4
Vector [English: Vector] 1.c4 d5 2.cd5 c6
Wheeler [Nimzowitsch Defence: Wheeler Gambit] 1.e4 Nc6 2.b4
Zilbermints - III [Queen's Gambit] 1.d4 d5 2.c4 b5
"Zurigo" [Queen's Pawn Game] 1.d4 d5 2.g4

If you notice more interesting openings, do not hesitate to suggest it here...


Gregory Kohut    (2010-06-30 01:16:58)
Encyclopedia of gambits

I suggest the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit or the King's Gambit Accepted Bishop Variation. 1.e4,e5 2.f4,exf4 3.Bc4


Andres E. Leon    (2010-08-11 00:41:41)
Future Rating Question

I am sorry to bother you, but I do not understand why the system does not take into account three of my last four games, in the moment to calculate my future rating. For example, the last game that I finished in the FICGS__CHESS__RAPID_A__000075 tournament was:

Game 39469

Last move : 1-0 2010 July 3 22:30:1

[Event "FICGS__CHESS__RAPID_A__000075"]
[Site "FICGS"]
[Date "2010.01.20"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Leon,Andres E."]
[Black "Faust,Dieter"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteElo "1904"]
[BlackElo "1980"]

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 Ne7 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 c5 7.Qg4 Kf8 8.Bd2 Qa5 9.a4 Nbc6 10.Nf3 c4 11.Be2 b5 12.O-O bxa4 13.Ra2 Ba6 14.Rfa1 Bb5 15.h4 h5 16.Qg5 a6 17.Bc1 Kg8 18.Qd2 Nf5 19.Bf1 Rh6 20.g3 Re8 21.Ba3 Rg6 22.Bh3 Rh6 23.Rb1 Rb8 24.Bxf5 exf5 25.Qe3 Nd8 26.Ne1 Ne6 27.Ng2 Rc8 28.Qf3 g6 29.Nf4 Nxf4 30.Qxf4 Rh7 31.Bd6 Rg7 32.e6 fxe6 33.Qh6 Qd8 34.Be5 Qf8 35.Re1 Rc6 36.R2a1 Kf7 37.Qxg7+ Qxg7 38.Bxg7 Kxg7 39.Kf1 Kf7 40.Ke2 Rb6 41.Rab1 Rc6 42.Kd2 Ke7 43.Kc1 Rc7 44.Kb2 Rc6 45.Ka3 Rc7 46.Re5 Kf6 47.Rbe1 Bd7 48.f3 Rc8 49.Ka2 Rg8 50.Rb1 Bb5 51.R5e1 Rc8 52.Rb4 Rg8 53.Rg1 Rb8 54.Ka3 Rb7 55.Rgb1 Rg7 56.Rg1 Rb7 57.R4b1 Rg7 58.Kb4 Rc7 59.Rh1 Rh7 60.Rh2 Rb7 61.Ka5 Rh7 62.Rg1 Ke7 63.g4 fxg4 64.fxg4 hxg4 65.Rxg4 Rh6 66.Rh1 Kd6 67.Rb1 Rh8 68.Rxg6 Rxh4 69.Rbg1 Rh2 70.R6g2 Rh3 71.Kb4 Rh6 72.Rg8 Rh2 73.R1g2 Rxg2 74.Rxg2 Be8 75.Ka5 Bb5 76.Kb6 Kd7 77.Kc5 Kc7 78.Rg7+ Bd7 79.Rh7 a3 80.Rh1 Be8 81.Ra1 Bb5 82.Rxa3 Kd7 83.Ra5 Ke7 84.Ra1 Kd7 85.Rh1 Kc7 86.Rh7+ Bd7 87.Rg7 a5 88.Rh7 1-0

Besides, I am playing the FICGS__CHESS__WCH_STAGE_1_GROUP_13__000008 group of the WCH, and I already finished three games.

Game 45063 Leon - Leclerc
Game 45064 Piantadosi - Leon
Game 45065 Leon - Dsouza

In one of them less than 10 moves were played (Game 45063 Leon - Leclerc ). However, in the other two games more than 20 moves were played, but when I finished these two games they were not taken into account in my future rating. Some of these games, particularly the Game 39469, I like very much and I spend a lot of efforts. It is a bitter that it is not used in my rating. I am afraid that the system is not actualizing my future rating, Can you help me to understand what is happening?

Again, I apologise for this inconvenience and I appreciate any help, thank you very much.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-09-17 00:29:38)
Svante Carl von Erichsen on Go WCH #4

As you probably read in the news, Svante Carl von Erichsen won the 4th FICGS Go WCH, beating his challenger Huayong Yang 3-2, Svante Carl wins the Go championship for the 4th time in a row!

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__GO__WORLD_CHAMPIONSHIP__000004

Svante Carl kindly accepted to answer a few questions on his match & computer Go:

FICGS - Hello Svante Carl, congratulations once again for winning this match against a surprising challenger who started here a few months ago with a 10 kyu rank, Huayong Yang, now rated 2438 after scoring 2 points in your 5 games match (which is a great achievement for sure). What did you think about his play & yours in these games?

Svante Carl - I think that he greatly underestimated his rank initially. As far as I know, he had not played for a long time and believed that his ability had therefore deteriorated. I do not think that you can drop more than one or at most two stones, though -- it is like cycling or swimming, you never unlearn it. I had the impression that we were quite evenly matched in summa, but our strengths are in different aspects of the game; I cannot really put my finger on the difference, though.

FICGS - After a previous win, you said that you spend a quite long time to analyze, which probably helps you to reach a higher level than 2 dan (your EGF rating) compared to OTB play... It looks obvious to me that correspondence chess moves generally ask for much more time than Go moves at a high level but I may be wrong, how much time did you spend on your longest analysis during the match? Do you remember for which move?

Svante Carl - I usually spend at least a few minutes on each move, except when the continuation is obvious. I often use more, and if I do not find a satisfactory move then, I will even postpone the move to another day, so that I can sleep over it and let my subconcious work on it.

FICGS - Do you watch other games played by your future opponent before starting your match? Do you think that this is really important in preparation like it can be in Correspondence chess?

Svante Carl - I sometimes glance over the games in the championship qualification tournament, but I do not try to prepare this way. I do not think that such preparation has any value in Go, especially in correspondence Go, since you have time during the game to do deep analysis. I usually try to take each game out of standard fuseki patterns pretty quickly, anyway. Of course, I know that my opponents in these title matches are always very tough and demand my utmost respect.

FICGS - Do you still follow the recent developments in computer Go? What do you think about the latest Go engines? How much time do we have yet before the best Go players are caught by computers according to you?

Svante Carl - I have the impression that the currently most promising technology (Monte Carlo/UCT) has the potential to achieve a rank of about 2 or 3 dan (EGF/KGS). I think that the next fundamentally new idea or breakthrough might add 2 stones, to get to 4 or 5 dan. I do not have any idea where it might go from that, but I think that it gets always harder.

What I would find interesting is having more intermediate board sizes. The best bots are almost on par with the best professionals on 9x9 now. I would propose to try to achieve a similar level on 11x11, then 13x13, then 15x15 etc.. Regarding 9x9, I think that the currently predominant komi of 7.5 points is too big, and that this has a negative impact on the experiments because the bots do not play in a balanced environment. It might be worthwhile to introduce the Taiwan rule (last move compensation) to get more fine-grained scores.

FICGS - What programs did you use this year to analyze? (just trying, of course it may be part of your secrets ;))

Svante Carl - It is not a secret. I just use an editor, usually EidoGo or CGoban3, to visualize the variations I imagine.

FICGS - Finally, what thoughts would you like to share on your 5 games, that could help us not to miss the best times or to help us to understand the most complex moves...

Svante Carl - I cannot give a detailed commentary, but I can try to summarize my impressions.

I think that Game 5 was quite balanced until move 21, but I think that the white invasion was a bit ambitious then. Of course, White did not need to die there, but after moves 32-33 I think that Black had a good result anyway (move 32 should go out faster in my opinion; note how E14 helps Black in enclosing White).

In Game 3, I think things got quite difficult for White in the lower left, but I let him take the initiative by backing off at move 35 (I should have simply closed off F10 then). White gained control of the centre as a result, and in the large endgame, I lost too many points there.

In Game 4, I fell behind in the opening through some slow moves (there was some discussion on the Life-in-19x19 forum about this, see the link in the comments of that game). In the endgame, Black then lost some points in the centre, so that I was a bit ahead when the game timed out.

In Game 1, I made some bad decisions on the left side, and never managed to turn things around. I think I was behind by about 5 points in the end.

In Game 2, I think that Black should not have ignored move 24. After I got quite some territory from my moyo and also reduced his top side, I could play it safe.

I look forward to the games with Olivier Drouot that recently started, but I also hope that Yang Huayong will re-enter the championship cycle.


Scott Nichols    (2010-09-19 00:07:15)
Corr. Chess Maxims

It is precisely our game Daniel which brought up the draw offer maxim idea. To offer a draw every move or two is clearly distracting. Plus it also included the other maxim about rating differences. You were Black, about 80 points lower in rating, so I had the most to lose by accepting any draw offer.

Maybe in the endgame when it is a book draw, either player can offer the draw "once". But our game was barely out of the opening. Of course these are just "general rules of conduct" and each game is different. So I stand by my original ideas.


Scott Nichols    (2010-09-19 01:45:45)
Corr. Chess Maxims

I remember that game now, it did end in a draw. And you are right about what I said at the end. But I also remember the repeated draw offers that were rejected each time. You were Black, lower rated and we were barely out of the opening, so it was a distraction. I play OTB chess also and believe me, continued rejected draw offers would get that person a loss for that game. A person shouldn't have to ask someone to please quit doing something irritating, most people get subtle hints. Also, I disagree about "telling a person so", that should be done by the TD or Webmaster. That could be another maxim. "in case of any disagreements, please consult TD."

A "maxim" is just a suggestion, not a "rule". So people, especially newcomers, can know what IS and IS NOT proper during the course of a game.


Daniel Parmet    (2010-09-30 21:56:55)
WCH Stage 1 groups (new players)

I agree immensely!

Further i've noticed that the color pairings tends to be very very bad for seed 2 & 3 but great for seed 1 & 4.

As seed 2 I get black against 1&4 as seed 3 I get black against 1 4 but as seed 4 I get white against 1&3. Yet these color disadvantages are not at all included as a tiebreak in any way.

The result is that in the last Wch as seed2 I never got a useful white having two tough blacks with seed #1 & #4 but in the Wch before as seed #4 I have no tough blacks because I had white against seed #1 &#3. I'm not quite sure the solution other than to somehow tie the colors into tiebreak before ratings.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-10-01 01:42:40)
WCH Stage 1 groups (new players)

Hi Daniel, maybe it would be more fair to reverse the colors (seed 1 plays black against seed 2 and so on)... I'm not sure if it is better but we can think about it. The color is not a good tiebreak IMO, does anyone else have an opinion on this?

Hi Garvin : "2) All the provisional rated players are put into groups by themselves." , you mean they play together in special groups? We can think about it as well but one goal of the championship was to help those players to find their place quicker in the rating list before the next cycles. I'm not sure if a 2300 player provisionnaly rated 1800 is an advantage for anyone else in the group more than seed 1.


Daniel Parmet    (2010-10-05 19:12:30)
WCH Stage 1 groups (new players)

My point is that seed one has a HUGE advantage because of the fact 1) Tie breakers AND 2) colors are always in their favor. So it makes it very very hard for another player to overturn this. Black against the highest rated usually best you can ask for is a draw resulting in the fact you now have to win the rest of your games in order to not Tie the highest rated (or pray for an upset). Cause if you tie... they just win on tiebreaks.


Garvin Gray    (2010-10-06 14:43:08)
Colour allocation change in WCH round robins

Thib: Is there a table to view for how the pairings are made on here? From looking at the pairings from my current WCH group, I was struggling to find out how the pairings are different from the 7/8 berger pairing table.

I am seed 1 and I have white against 2, black against 3, white against 4 and so on.

Seed 2 has black against seed 1, white against seed 3, black against seed 4 and so forth.

I think this is right, but without the tables provided for this site, I can not confirm this.

I am not sure whether seed 1 should be white or black against seed 2. This is because the TER rules mean that if seed 1 ties with seed 3, then seed 1 progresses regardless of which colour.

Which colour seed 1 is allocated probably means more depending where in the serpentine pairings the group 1.

If it is group 1, then seed 1 will be playing seed 22(overall)(seed 2 in Group 1) and then seed 23(overall)(Seed 3 in Group 1).
But if we are talking about Group 11, then it is a battle for seeds 11 and 12. Seed 3 in Group 11 wil be around seed 33(overall).

I am not fussed either way, but this would depend on alot on what tables are used for pairings on here.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-10-06 15:29:07)
Colour allocation change in WCH round robins

No table, only a simple algorithm (with eg. $p1 = 0,1,2,3,4,5,6...) :

for ($p1=0;$p1<$players_count;$p1++)
{
for ($p2=$p1+1;$p2<$players_count;$p2++)
{
for ($round=1;$round<=$rounds;$round++)
{

if (NOT $reverse AND ($round+$p2-$p1)/2 is EVEN) OR (YES $reverse AND ($round+$p2-$p1)/2 is ODD)
{ $player[$p1] plays White against $player[$p2] }

else { $player[$p1] plays Black against $player[$p2] }

}
}
}

Games are created the order they appear in the tournament. (may be hard to read, the idea may look like obvious to you though)


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-10-08 15:11:13)
Colour allocation change in WCH round robins

Okay, not exactly an algorithm, this is mostly simplified PHP. The result for a 7 players with 1 round (single round robin) tournament is:

White : Black

1 : 2
3 : 1
1 : 4
5 : 1
1 : 6
7 : 1

2 : 3
4 : 2
2 : 5
6 : 2
2 : 7

3 : 4
5 : 3
3 : 6
7 : 3

4 : 5
6 : 4
4 : 7

5 : 6
7 : 5

6 : 7

So here is the table for 7 players single round robin.


Garvin Gray    (2010-10-08 15:26:38)
Colour allocation change in WCH round robins

Hello Daniel Parmet,

In the other thread WCH Stage 1 groups (new players), in your first post-

Further i've noticed that the color pairings tends to be very very bad for seed 2 & 3 but great for seed 1 & 4.

As seed 2 I get black against 1&4 as seed 3 I get black against 1 4 but as seed 4 I get white against 1&3. Yet these color disadvantages are not at all included as a tiebreak in any way.

From looking at the pairings posted above by Thibault about how colours are determined on this site, I believe your post contains a factual error which does not help your argument at all about the unfairness of pairings on here in the context of colours.

On this site-
Seed 2 is black against 1&4.
Seed 3 is WHITE, repeat WHITE, against 1 and 4.
Seed 4 is BLACK, repeat BLACK against 1&3.


Lalit Kapoor    (2010-10-20 08:18:46)
WCH Stage 1 groups (new players)

The same happens to me. I started as 1805 (provisional) in WCH 8. Now after 5 games finished I scored 4.5/5. Against 2nd seed I got a draw. And against seed 1 I will get at least a draw with slight advantage as Black in endgame.

Garvin Gray question is right. The 1800 (provisional) player gets an advantage for being an underdog.

But at last there would be only one champion and he have to qualify all stages.


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-25 01:30:27)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Thanks for your continue interested Wayne! Yeah as of now. I think we are doing a two game per round(1 white and 1 black) set. And I think there are players who will being playing a one game at time approach. And to help with the time difference we are working on a quicker format to help offset the time difference. I still believe that Havery Williamson will still consider playing if the gameload is not that great. Even if he still declines I think with yourself I have 3 or 4 players that are inside the top 25 on this site. I'm hopeful that devassal thibault can help me get the word to the other top players in a effort to get a couple more of the top 50. It will help when I finally can have a 100% idea of the format. I'll you posted on here or on the Rybka Forum. When we finally have more or all the details worked out.
Jimmy


Jimmy Huggins    (2010-10-25 08:28:18)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

Thanks Thibault, My hope is to finish the details within the next 2 weeks. No not a round-robin, because that would simply be to much and to long. So I have gone with Vytron idea of a type of Elimination/Knockout tournament that is currently being discuss. As you are good about getting tournaments formed if you can read the current discussion and give some feedback on here or the rybka forum I would be grateful! It is in the corr chess section on the rybka forum.

Here are some of the key points and some interesting ideas that are being thrown around.

As I know most of the FICGS players play a lot of games so I have made a system that you play a 2 game match per round (One white and One Black). This would usually be a bad idea because of CC high draw rates. But we are thinking of using a unique draw odds system. Thought to many this may sounds a little strange its actually a great idea to inspire fighting chess for both sides. The idea was given by FICGS player Gino Figlio

"The scoring system idea- to draw with white (0.4), draw with black (0.6), win with white (1.0), win with black (1.1), loss with white (-0.1), loss with black (0.0)"

Another thing we are working on is the pairing system. As of now the only idea is to use a swiss pairing system after the first round.

Time Control- Since this is going to be called a "World Blitz Correspondence Chess Championship" The time controls are going to be a little faster than normal corr chess. It will be 48hr per move. But there will be a bluff time in here to help AN critical positions. This is also being debated. Right now we are looking at something between 1 weeks to 2 weeks(168 hours to 336 hours).

I had announce on the Rybka Forum in the last couple of days that a prize fund was being offer. I haven't had all my sources comeback to me yet. But as of know the fund is $1500 USD. It could be more, but I'll make official amount known before the tournament will start. I would say the winners share will be between 500 to 750. It all depends on what info I get back. I'm going to try and make all the prizes reasonable. And try and make it for the top 8 or 10 players. Also the winner will be announced the "World Blitz Correspondence Chess Champion"

I will be trying to finalize the details of the tournament in a quick fashion so I can figure out if the players interested would want to play or not. The tournament will begin just after the new year. It will be flexiable so get all the players in and know who they are playing.

The final details are that we are working hard to make the Rybka Forum really to play this kind of tournament. There is a new sub forum that will be made to help with out the traffic that would be going on with all the games. There is almost plans on getting a clock system work out. As at these time controls that would be critical.

Thanks in advance for any feedback form Thibault de Vassal and any other FICGS player!

Jimmy


Gino Figlio    (2010-10-26 00:55:48)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

The proposal was based on the assumption that it was a double elimination knockout, meaning you get dropped if you lose 2 games. Since there may be a lot of draws, the new scoring system may allow to drop players with the lower scores after 2 rounds and will give more weight to better results with the black pieces. This is experimental but may stimulate more fighting chess.


Scott Nichols    (2010-10-26 05:33:11)
Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum

I very much like the idea of giving more weight to Black, whether it is a win or draw. I agree it will make for fighting chess and possibly make White (or Black) try some different variations to go for the win.


Sebastian Boehme    (2010-10-31 20:11:04)
Creating an opening book

Hi Garvin,

Book making ia for example in my case always been a very time-intense and manually tuned process. I never do import any outside games to my book.

Guidelines on how to starting out in creating an opening book you can find (or probably have already found), here:
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=11798

That site got some useful links

General rule of thumb, work on each system one by one. My favourite example: I as white play 1. e4 and Black replies 1....f5, so the Elephant Gambit arises.

Now I want to find good white moves for it, so I enable in my Book allow move adding and check my Correspondence and Playchess Games database for the replies of white. Also I see what major engines think about the moves offered by the database in say 1-2 minute analysis and what these engines themselves gotta offer. This way a reply to the elephant gambit (or maybe more) for move 2 of white can be found.
Also not in any case 1-2 minute analysis will be sufficient. You need to figure this out for yourself.

The less time intensive process: Create a database where you import games filtered by very well chosen criteria (for instance recent games i.e. 2008-2010). Then import the database games into a new empty book.

That's all I know about how it could be done.

Sebi


Scott Nichols    (2010-12-15 23:20:40)
Chess positions too complex for engines

Hi Thib. This is one of the main games I had in mind when I responded to your quote.

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__CHESS__BLITZ_SILVER__000019

Or Game #40749

After 50. ...Be2 Rybka could only think of lines keeping the King close to the g4 pawn. Try it yourself anybody, the engine just didn't get it. It was a blitz game, but even at that time control I could see that my black Bishop could guard against the pawn advance from afar. So the winning strategy was to march the King to the other side of the board and escort the a-pawn to the queening square. This idea obviously was far beyond the engines horizon. After that game, my respect for Rybka's endgame play went down considerably.


Thibault de Vassal    (2010-12-16 09:54:53)
Preparation in sicilian

Another game I remember, the typical win by preparation (I was absolutely not prepared in this variant yet) in a blitz game - Eros & Alberto made it well with this line during the 1st Freestyle tournament.

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=15363

I don't remember what move is the point exactly at a first sight, somewhere around Qxe5 but Black did not expect what kind of endgame will happen after the next 20 moves, btw many are forced but the line may be too long for most engines. The game was lost already, and I'm not sure if engines choose the right way (wouldn't be a trap anymore)...


Vjacheslav Perevozchikov    (2011-01-13 05:08:59)
Eros Riccio is the new FICGS chess champ

Hi! Thank you both for the great match. Congratulations to the winner!!!

I have a question. What happened in the only game that not finished in a draw?
24... Rxc2!? wasn't a better choice for black? Or I missed something?


Thibault de Vassal    (2011-01-30 21:07:31)
Eros on his win in the 4th chess WCH

Eros Riccio kindly accepted to answer a few questions on his win in the 4th FICGS chess WCH, and explained how one particular game influenced another one that he finally won:

- Hi Eros, first of all congratulations for your latest outstanding results at FICGS, you won the Freestyle tournament, now two chess championships in a row... When the privilege of the champion is to defend his title without playing the preliminary tournaments, you are involved in all championship cycles & a few regular tournaments, do you plan to avoid that anyone can even reach the championship final in the future? :-)

Thanks! I must admit that this is really a magic moment for me in chess... if you consider that despite my recent ICCF Grand Master Title, probably I will also soon win my third italian Correspondence Champion Title out of three participations in the Italian Final Tournaments. And now also this huge satisfaction of being the FICGS Champion! I look forward to seeing a new challenger soon, I wonder who he will be, but let me enjoy the next few months for now ;-)

- What are your impressions on the games? Did you have any strategy from the beginning to the end? Finally did it work or was there another factor? (without revealing your secrets, of course :))

The games in the opening were as I expected, all Najdorf Sicilians except one game where I played 1.d4. My goal was to win at least one game, so I tried different aggressive variations as White (6.Bg5, 6.f3, 6.Be3 and 6.h3) with the hope of catching Edward unprepared on at least one of these, but uff, he was very well prepared on each one of them! A curious thing is that my biggest chance of winning happened in a game where I had the Black pieces! So Edward had to take some risks in one of his games where he had Black (the games where he had White were already finished or all very drawish) he was forced to avoid an easy draw he had (the 6.h3 game) and eventually he lost that game. Happy of having reached my goal of winning at least one game, I accepted his draw offer in that other game (6.f3 e5 7.Nb3 Be6 8.Be3 Be7 9.Be2) where I had good winning chances.

- You probably noticed, like many correspondence chess players, that the hardware still fastly improves while chess engines are continuously getting stronger, particularly since that "supposed" clones of Rybka (some may be even stronger than Rybka herself) appeared in the race. Do you think that the rate of draws will be so high soon that it may definitely kill correspondence chess? Do you have any opinion on these new engines?

I think that despite the big improvement of Hardwares and engines, we are still very far (and we will still be in the next 5 years, hopefully) from a situation where all the games will most probably end in a draw. So I think we can enjoy correspondence chess for many more years in the future, even if of course the Draw percentage at the highest levels will be higher and higher.

- I remember that you were surprised to win your match against Alberto in the Candidates Final of the 5th cycle (the reason why you do not even have to defend your title this time), the WCH rules (particularly the co-existence of the round-robin tournament & knockout tournament) are obviously not well understood by all players, what do you think about this system and the tie in 8 games matches? Are there changes you'd like to see in the future?

Yes, I really was! We were both convinced that with all draws, the higher rated player would have won (Alberto was higher rated than me in that match). Anyway it was our fault, as we didn't read the rules carefully. I am not sure what changes could be done in the future... maybe this is anyway the best setup, no new ideas are coming to my mind right now.

- Do you have a few more words for Edward after these nice games? Maybe also for your future opponents? :)

It was a real pleasure for me to play him, not only for the interesting games we played, but also for the friendly chats we had during the exchanges of the moves. I hope to play him again in the future for a rematch.

- Thanks for your answers and congratulations again!

Welcome, and thanks ;-)

_________

It is very interesting to see that a even a player like Eros prefered to minimize the risks (avoiding mouse drops or whatever) as much as possible by accepting a draw in a game where he had winning chances. Correspondence chess is definitely not all about chess, that's probably the lesson.

Also it is reassuring to read that correspondence chess is NOT dead yet, nor soon :)


Jimmy Huggins    (2011-02-12 04:18:32)
WBCCC Round 1 Update

This is the first update for the WBCCC, I guess some of you have been following some of the games there. There have been a lot of interesting games and some surprises a lot the way. As I'm reporting on the FICGS forum I will make most of this about the FICGS side. Here are some results so far and starting at the top boards.

B2 Uly(Vytron) vs Gino Figlio- Gino does a good job of defending a ..2.e6 line of the Sicilian. And both players agree to a draw after 34 moves.

B4 Daniel Parmet vs Sebastian Boehme- This was a Poison Pawn line of the Sicilian. The game ended before it even got out of book. A short draw, I think both people agreed that it was a good result for each player.

B6- Matt O'Brein vs Omprakash- A surprise if only for how short the game was. Matt shows his tactual muscles when his higher rated opponent much of had and oversight in this defense. As 23.g6! h6 24.Bxh6! and it looks like black has burned his bridges in this game.

B8-Stephanie vs Ruben Comes- This maybe the biggest surprise in round at least in terms of the bigger name on the FICGS side. Stephanie what looks to be a prefect opening all of the B90 lines and everyone agrees 32.Bc3! to be a new novelty and a very good one at that. Stephanie went on to grind Ruben down to a lost endgame. I very interesting game that has be to be seen to believe, I guess this going to show, that not all B90 lines lend to draws.

B13-Scott Nichols vs indrajit_sg- This was a long fought draw. When looking at the game early I thought white may have some chance to take advantage of his open g-file. But not a lot materialize later in the endgame(form the engines point of view).

B14-donkasand vs David Evans- David enter into dangerous territory with this B90 line. At move 19 he played ..Rb8 which looks to be a move to get out of book, because the other moves didn't look so good. Credit to David for finding a draw line in this game. Its another game with a look.

Kamesh Nookala vs Jimmy Huggins- What can I say I played an experimental opening and it backfired :) A well played game by Kamesh. Thanks for the chance to have a good fight with you.

Now on the 2nd set of games(Each player has 2 games in each round)

B3 Ramil Germanes vs Moz- Ramil here played a safe line in the B90 form the white side. So this looked like and easy draw.

B4 Sebastian Boehme vs Uly(Vytron)- Vytron plays and interesting side line of the Crao-Kann and play was very shape, but I got the feeling black played to ambitiously and had the worse of the position. He found a good defensive sacrifice and the good was hold to a draw. I think Sebi had winning chances, but I will have to look over the game to come up with an idea on that one. Anyway a great game to look over.

Ruben Comes vs Matthew O'Berin- Maybe the sharpest and most ambitious game in round 1. This goes in the the B97 lines, but Ruben goes for the Qf3 side line and produces a complex position after Rd3. I love this game so much I want to post the link again for everyone to please watch this game and post a comment about it.

http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20213

B13 Fulcrum2000 vs Scott Nichols- Scott tries his luck to be ambitious and backfires with his Bh4 idea. Even when looking at the game. I was thinking it to be a good idea, but as it turns out. It goes as just losing a tempo. I thought this was one of the more instructive games of the round. I liked the way white played the endgame.

And the last result I have for the round for the FICGS players is

B17-indrajit_sg vs Kamesh Nookala- This was an interesting draw were white plays and early sideline in the Sicilian that tends to be drawish unless black forces the play. Another well played game by both sides.

I just want to say there are a lot of games one should look at. As more results come in on the FICGS side I will posted. In my opinion one should follow Wayne's games I have enjoyed his play so far. He had to comeback some in his wild game with black vs deka, but I get the feeling this game will ended in a draw. I would also follow the underrated Matt O'Berin in games to come. He has proven to be a great player so far.


Thibault de Vassal    (2011-02-17 16:46:15)
Silver chess games, W/B balance

Just an idea... as the Epoints balance for White and Black may be not fair enough (as a reminder the current rule for e.g. bullet/lightning/blitz is: "1 game match (regular) - In case of a draw, the prize is divided, however player Black will fully get back his E-Points whereas player White will get the rest."), what would be a better system according to you?

On the basis of 19.8 Epoints at the end of the game, maybe we could try:

If result is 1-0, W+ 19.0 / B+ 0.8
If result is 1/2-1/2, W+ 9 / B+ 10.8
If result is 0-1, W+ 0 / B+ 19.8

or...

If result is 1-0, W+ 18.0 / B+ 1.8
If result is 1/2-1/2, W+ 8 / B+ 11.8
If result is 0-1, W+ 0 / B+ 19.8

Any idea?


Kamesh Nookala    (2011-02-17 18:28:07)
Silver chess games, W/B balance

I second Scottie, the first one is the best choice. The other option appears to be favouring black too much..


Thibault de Vassal    (2011-02-17 18:32:27)
Silver chess games, W/B balance

You may be right Kamesh, but it could be just more exciting after all... I'm not sure if I would prefer Black or White there.


Kamesh Nookala    (2011-02-17 19:04:39)
Silver chess games, W/B balance

Well, considering the amount of Silver Games that are being played, I think you can give the 2nd one a try. No harm. That gives Black a chance to play with damm precision! Go for it :)


Scott Nichols    (2011-02-17 19:06:53)
Silver chess games, W/B balance

I think the 2nd option would give Black some advantage in points after a few games since so many games are draws. It would definitely make White push hard for a win! Either way, I like it. :)


Daniel Parmet    (2011-02-17 20:14:59)
Silver chess games, W/B balance

question.. if black is getting back .8 no matter what, would it be easy just to code that black's entry fee is .8 less? Perhaps this might be the better way to go that you have to pay less to enter a game as black.


Daniel Parmet    (2011-02-28 23:31:07)
Plea for classical rating help

Actually my rating will probably take a severe plunge on the May 1st list because many of my games against 1900-2000s will be drawn each one will majorly drag my rating down despite the fact this is the predicted outcome as black.


Alexander Blinchevsky    (2011-03-05 14:40:26)
Strange game

I wonder to see that at such level someone will continue playing in that position: http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=41015
The game was completely decided over 1 year ago, for now it's even force mate shown by any engine.
The only reason to continue playing that I see for the black is waiting for the opponent's (me) death. Sorry, Mariusz, I am not planning to do that in nearest future. :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2011-03-10 12:40:21)
FICGS chess World Championship #9

Hi Daniel, I don't get your point. Now you're rated 2094 so you would be probably a top seed in the next regular group, playing maybe 2 provisionals (maybe one centaur rated 2000 and one centaur or human rated 1800 or 1700) instead of ~2 centaurs rated 1800 + playing as Black against a player rated 2200. I really think that it is a better "deal" for players rated 2000-2100 also. Yes you may still lose a few points (less than before IMO), but your chances to go to round 2 and play stronger players are much higher... I cannot say more.

@Garvin: your proposal makes sense. By "if possible" I mean that the rule is not strictly 2150 or 2300, I'll just try to make coherent groups (in size & ratings) so it quite looks like your way in practice I think.


Thibault de Vassal    (2011-03-24 15:36:57)
5th Go WCH, analysis by SC. von Erichsen

Svante Carl von Erichsen is FICGS Go champion... for the 5th time! After his win in the match that opposed him to Olivier Drouot, here are his analysis on the games:

_______________________


- Congratulations for this 5th win in the FICGS Go championship! By seeing the score you give less and less chances to your opponents who seem stronger each time though... Several games may look quite mysterious to weaker players. What happened during these games?

- Svante Carl von Erichsen:

Hi!

I do not have the impression that my opponents have less and less
chances. I also make many mistakes, and was in a clearly bad position
in at least one game. Olivier made many very unusual moves in the
opening, which were difficult to handle in a calm manner.

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=47578

In game 3 (47578), this is apparent at move 18. White has gone for a
very centre-oriented game, while Black has made more direct profit.
It is difficult to say who got the better deal. Move 18 itself is
very unusual, and I am not sure whether the result was satisfactory
for me. I think that moves 41 and 43 were important, as stabilizing
the group in the centre takes priority when the centre is dominated by
White like this. At move 53, it is clear that Black needs to stabilize
the top group, but D18 seems more important in retrospect. Move 62 is
a bit odd---I think that living with S16 instead would be better. I
think that Black got a territorial advantage here. Since White got
additional central strength, Black turned to make his central group
safe again, which should be enough to win now. White 94 tries to
shake up things again, but getting separated on the lower side makes
it very hard for him.

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=47580

In game 5 (47580), Olivier chose a very unusual move again at move 8.
I think that the outcome until move 17 favours Black, however. At
move 36, it looks like Black will have to live in the corner, but the
white enclosure does have its holes. Alas, White's response to the
forcing move at P10 was a severe blunder, as Black can take back the
right side. Move 55 was big, but I had not anticipated that the fight
after move 56 would be so hard for me. I think that after move 93,
White put too much emphasis on hollowing out what once seemed like
prospective black territory. The ponnuki in the centre was worth much
more than what White made on the second line. With that strength,
reducing the white framework on the left was no question. I think
that White then tried too hard in the centre.

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=47576

Game 1 (47576) was characterized by a big fight starting from the
joseki in the lower right corner. I guess that a stronger player
could point out several mistakes by both sides. It resulted in a big
exchange, where quite some aji remained in both positions. Move 90 is
an unusual idea, it would be more normal to extend on the side. 91
and 95 were intended as forcing moves to give some support to the top
side. I think that Black has good prospects after move 99 and
especially after 113. White started an interesting invasion on the
left then, which was however stopped by the blunder at 138.

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=47579

Game 4 (47579) again featured some unusual moves in the opening,
namely moves 7 and 9. I think that immediately plunging through at 10
was not good. It was quite difficult for me to keep territorial
balance afterwards. I think that my invasion at the top was
premature, but it seemed like I could not keep up without it. The
attack at L13 was severe. I got lucky that Black kept back a bit, so
that I could get the cut at E7, which was more important than the six
stones around N13. It would have been possible to save them at move
98, but at the cost of letting Black break through L10. Sacrificing
them allowed me to cement the centre to put me comfortably ahead. L9
was then the start of a desperate attempt to reduce the centre. I was
quite sure that I could capture it, even though simply connecting
would most likely have been enough. I then made a big blunder again
with move 130 (I had to double hane), allowing a game-deciding ko.
Black had a lot of threats against the lower right corner, and I think
that this exchange would have put him ahead. However, he thought he
had an internal threat at D10, which I think was not one, as there was
no additional eye in the centre yet.

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=47577

In game 2 (47577), he got me in the opening with another of his
experiments (move 7). I think that I could have been satisfied if I
simply played the keima to P2 at move 14. However, I activated the
central stone instead, which led to Black getting solid positions on
both sides, while I lived small in the corner and struggled in the
centre. I then succeeded in making him overconcentrated on the lower
side, but at the expense of a quite large corner and not making many
points myself. Move 80 tries to stir things up more. I think that if
Black had secured O13 with move 97, the game would have been over.
However, things only began to look good for White after move 127,
which had to be played at R8 (it is sente against the middle group
then, so Black can live with S5). It is still not over, however, as
White has two weak groups to take care of. The lower side group can
live locally with a ko at G1, but the other group has to struggle---it
would be nice to find a clean sacrifice plan here, because it is hard
for the two groups not to compete for eye space. This was the last
game to end, and my opponent seems to have chosen to resign all when
he did not see a way to win the overall match anymore.

All in all, these were very interesting games where I think I learnt a
lot. I wish to thank my opponent, who played very well.

Thanks!

Svante


Jimmy Huggins    (2011-04-29 14:45:26)
WBCCC-New stuff and Round 2 Update

The last round was very exciting! And this round has had some great games as well. To speak of there is just 4 games left. Here is the report of the most important games this round.

Starting at the top boards. We have have...

B1-Loboestepario (Gino Figilo) vs CumnorChessClub (Kevin E.Plant)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21163-

This game followed a Catalan. Gino makes ambitious choice to go with 5.Nbd2! I gave this move a ! Not because of its theoretical standing. But because it will lead to a position were white will give up a whole pawn for rapid development. Never the less, black is equal to the task and managers to hold on to the pawn for most of the game and keep the game balanced. With my human eyes, I thought for sure white had an advantage! After move 20.Be4, It looks like white has 2 racking bishops. While black has one black locked in! But in depth analysis shows, that black can hold on. And shows great defensive technique. Down the stretch. Well played by Gino and Kevin. On of my favorite games to follow.

B3-Mark Eldridge vs David Evans
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21165-

David has gotten tested in both his black games in this tournament. And this game was no different. We had another B90 line in this game. And ...8.h5 was used. This is becoming a common line in this tournament. Mark's treatment on the white side was great! I think his future opponents will think twice before trying this line again. At move 22, the game reaches the sharpest point. After move 22.fxe5! I thought that Mark had a chance vs David. But David founds some good moves to exchanges pieces and hold for a draw. The best of which was the combo of ...33.Rf3 and ...36.Rxg3! This was a nice find by him. Great job to David and Mark! I look forward to seeing both these players again.

B4-Stephanie vs Fulcrum2000
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21166-

I would normally just post FICGS member games here. But this maybe one of the top 2 or 3 most important games of this round. In what turns out to be the most exciting game of the round IMO. White has shown that they are quite good in the opening phase. At move 18 they choose 18.b3 which was suggested as being the novelty move. White gets a very strong game and after a king tour to capture the pawn. It looked like a win for sure!, but it seems a mistake was made at move 38. Instead of 38.Qc1!? the move 38.Qe8! seems to be a near winner. I thoughts on why this move was missed is because, White was in time trouble in both games. I have to believe this was a favor. As we speak Stephanie is close to defeat in the other game that I will talk about shortly. I would watch her for the reminded of the tournament. I think they will learn form this experience and be even stronger going future. Well done by both players.

B5-NATIONAL12 vs Kamesh
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21167

Two of my good friends battling here. This was a B90 battle. The novelty move was the straight forward looking 27.h4, but after some exchanges. White has to settled for equality. A good match to follow, the one other note made was this was a line pioneered by Eros Riccio.

B7-Wayne Lowrance vs tomski1981
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21169-

Wayne plays a good line vs the french vs tomski. In fact by the database expert, it was in a 100% win line!! But after the queens come off the board. It burns out to a quiet draw. Wayne has had good opening results, but has yet to get in the winners column. I have faith that Wayne will win a game very soon. Good game to both in this one.

B8-Uly vs indrajit_sg
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21170-

This was a nice game to follow. A french defense was chosen. The point in which it gets interest is the choice to play 19.bxc3!? Which leads to 21.Nh6+!? I loves this sires of moves! 27.Rh3! was also a good move here. But its seems black has just enough resources to hold the balance. ..54.Bxg6! was a good finally touch. Well played by both players.

B9-Balabachi(William Fuller) vs Sebastian Boehme
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21171

What was talked about as a drawish Ruy position. I found to be quite a game with all the early fireworks. I also liked the material imbalance in this game. Sebi has a rep of being very difficult to beat with the black pieces. This helps when you have the Ruy and the Posion pawn line of the Sicilian. As two of your best weapons. ;)

B10-Schachmatt (Matt O'Brein) vs Weirwindle
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21172-

This was an interesting Richter-Rauzer game. 15.Qf4 was the novelty move, Form there it got crazy. 21.Nb3 seems to invite a pawn race. Which in the end white loses. This was a tough game for white. I think he should have been able to hold it. But it was still a good game to follow.

B11-donkasand vs Ruben Comes
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21173

This was a nice positional game by Mike (Donkasand), This was a 6.h3 Sicilian. And we get the usually good defense here. ..7.h5 White gets great positional pressure for the whole game and even gets a pawn, but Ruben wholes for a draw.

B12-natmaku vs ralunger (Ramil Germanes)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21174

This game was a Petroff with 5.Nc3. This kind of move gives white rapid development. Its seems black equalize pretty quickly. And on move 21 a draw was agreed on.

B13-Scott Nichols vs Omprakash
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21175

This was an interesting King's Gambit game. I think Scott didn't study his opponents rep. :) The King's Gambit is Om's specialty. So this was an easy draw for black.

B14-Keoki010 (George Clement) vs deka
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21176-

In this game black returns to his pet line of the Sicilian with 2.a6(Which he played in the last round) I believe this is called the O'Kelly variation. This time around he goes for ..7.Qb6 which looks a little better than ..7.Bb5!? A draw probably should have been possible, but George was able to grid out a win. Well played by both players.

B15-parmetd (Daniel Parmet)vs SpiderG (Peter Marriott)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21177

This was a King Indian by black. And white does a good job of out playing his opponent in this game. Unfortunately it seems Peter has gotten busy in his life. This game was decide by time.

B16-Banned for Life vs TheHug(Jimmy Huggins)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21178

I face off against Alan who has the white pieces. And is consider to be one of the best players when playing 1.b3. It was a difficult game for me as I decide before hand to play a dangerous line. Needless to say I lose this game after a few small mistakes on my part. I am founding that all the players in the WBCCC are good, I maybe better off being a commentator lol, but no one would have that.

This was the first set of games.

Here is the 2nd game of the 2nd round in the next post.


Jimmy Huggins    (2011-04-29 18:36:20)
WBCCC-New stuff and Round 2 Update

B1-CumnorChessClub (Kevin E.Plant) vs Moz
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21180

Kevin makes an interesting choice here with 2.a4!? vs the Silicon Defense. Not exactly sure what he wanted out of the opening. I can only guess he wanted to mix it up here. Anyway, black equalizes fairly quickly and is better. But after 18.a5! He finds the best way to equalize and both agree to a draw.

B2-jitan vs Loboestepario (Gino Figilo)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21181-

The somewhat unknown Jitan has had a good tournament. And is given his ICCF SM opponent all he can handle. In a game that is still going. Gino is down a pawn, but it appears to be a draw and I would guess the game is about to finish. This was an interesting approach by Gino who gets in b5 and h5 very early in this game. And Jitan plays the most naturally looking sac. 13.Nbxd5! it looked like for a long time Gino was in trouble, but he has found enough resources IMO. A well played game by both players.

B3-Fulcrum2000 vs Mark Eldridge
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21182

This was a nice French game to watch. The novelty move was ..11.Na5, OTB I would like white in this game and I had a feeling that white possibly could have risked an attack, but this game came down to endgame play and White was able to outplay black in the end.

B4-Kamesh vs Stephanie
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21183-

In my opinion this is the most important game the round and it is reaching its fianlly stages. I believe Stephanie to be one of the top players in this event. She has been doing well, but Kam has played the near perfect opening and got her in trouble. If you remember my previous post you remember I talk about Stephanie was in time trouble. Which has not help the cause. The one move I enjoyed the most so far in this game was 36.Ra5!, this was a nice exchange sac. And its given Kam nice pass pawns on the Queen-side. I would guess this game will be over soon. It has been a nice game to watch.

B5-David Evans vs National12
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21184

A battle of the English Countryman here. :) This was the Open Defense of the Ruy. Form the comments I got, it seems that the opening was played about as perfectly as you can get. David posed some problems to Paul(National12), but it ends in a fairly easy draw. One finally note ..10.d4 IMO is a very difficult move to beat.

B6-ppipper vs jitan
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21168-

This is one of the finally 4 games still playing. What looks like to be a draw here. The white black has been dancing for a few moves now, but blacks back rank is weak. That equals a drawish game. :)
This game started out form B90 and so has a ton of theory.

B7-indrajit_sg vs Wayne Lowrance
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21186

I fairly quiet B90 game. I don't think white got much out of the opening. Well played by Wayne here.

B8-tomski1981 vs Uly
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21187

A battle of good friends here. IMO I thought white played the this Queens pawn opening passively. And so we had an early draw at move 26.

B9-Sebastian Boehme vs Schachmatt (Matt O'Brein)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21188-

This is one of the 4 last games. And I have to say its been a good game. We had an interesting Sicilian position. I had thought black was in trouble. But after he tripled up on the d-file. Then got massive exchanges. He looks like its headed toward a draw.

B10-Weirwindle vs donkasand
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21189-

This was a nice positional Sicilian game. Although it ends in a draw. Its a must see game! Watching the drawing combo at the end is very beautiful. It starts with ..27.e4! and you can watch it form there.

B11-Ruben Comes vs Balabachi(William Fuller)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21190

Ruben opened up this rep with 3.h3!? and we ended up with a closed type of Sicilian. But his opponent stayed strong. Though out the game. Even if it looked like Ruben had some pressure. In the finally position.

B12-ralunger (Ramil Germanes) vs keoki010 (George Clement)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21191-

This game saw the Exchange variation in the Queen's gambit. It has a high rate rate. But to Ramil credit he manage to give George a couple of weak pawns in the endgame, but not enough for any real advantage.

B13-Omparakash vs natmaku
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21193-

I would have hoped for more in this game. As I'm a lover of the 6.Bc4 (Sozin) Sicilian. After 14.e5!? this forces unneeded exchanges. After which, the game looked like a draw. And that is how it ended.

B14-deka vs Scott Nichols
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21194

Usually the Exchange Slav is pretty drawish. And this game was no different. But both players did try to mount some kind of advance. Both had good posts on each others side of the board. But a drawish opening is a drawish opening.

B15-TheHug (Jimmy Huggins) vs parmentd
(Daniel Parmet)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21195

I tried my luck in an opening that was not something with e4. And it didn't go as well I had hoped, Daniel was able to get a equal position fairly quickly. In my try at making new theory in a very uncommon line vs the King's Indian Defense.

And finally we have this last game.

B16-SpiderG (Peter Marriott) vs Banned for Life
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21196

This would have promised to be a nice Larson Attack game. By alas Peter timed out in this game as well. I would have loved to seen this attacking game with both sides castled on opposite sides.

Well that would do it for my reports for this round. This was a great round, and the next promises to be great as well. I will post info for the next round after the last game is over with.

Any feedback is welcome!


Philip Roe    (2011-04-30 01:34:38)
Amateur player beats Rybka 4 !?

The description of the play is not precise, but for sure what this guy did was to pull some version of the old trick of pitting Rybka White versus Rybka Black (Oh look, I can beat TWO computers!)


Jai Prakash Singh    (2011-05-02 01:32:46)
Breaking Stereotypes

Hi Chess Friends,

Now watch GM Igor Smirnov's latest excellent chess video lesson "Breaking Stereotypes" [about exploiting White's Bg5 or Bb5 or Black's Bg4 or Bb4 moves] free (no registration required) only at

http://chessthinkingsystems.blogspot.com/


Jimmy Huggins    (2011-05-15 13:34:12)
WBCCC Round 3 links and more

After 2 rounds FICGS has 5 of the top 10 places in the standings in the WBCCC 1. With Kevin #1 and Kamesh #4 at the top with 3 points and Gino #6, David #7, and Sebi #10. Well Rybka Forum has 4 of the top 10. Fulcrum2000 #2, ppipper #3, WeirwindleX #8, National12 #9.

Many of these players are facing off against each other. Here are just a few games you that are must watch for this round.

Banned for Life vs Ruben Comes- Banned for Life (Alan) is one of the best with 1.b3. It should be interesting to see how Ruben combats this expert with the Larson System.

Sebastian Boehme vs David Evans- These two have crossed paths before on the freestyle field before. I took great interest in this match because Sebi has 1 on the highest winning % with the white pieces in the field and hasn't last a white game on FICGS. That I have seen. I can bet on some fireworks in this game.

Kamesh vs ppipper- Kam put on a good show with the white pieces vs one of the toughest opponents in the field (with my human eyes) and ppipper has done great with the black pieces. With both of his wins coming with the black pieces! O_o Should be fun :)

jitan vs Sebastian Boehme- Jitan is showing to be one of the top tier players in this event. I truly enjoy the tactical opening he played in his only win in the tournament so far in round 1 vs George. And gave Gino all he could handle in Round 2 (With my human eyes again) :)

A lot of the other games speak for themselves. Also keep on eye on Board 1 with Kevin. :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2011-07-31 03:12:58)
Eros on his win in the 4th chess WCH

Hi Don, you mean the draw problem in chess or correspondence chess? Drawish lines by White or/and Black?


Jai Prakash Singh    (2011-08-02 05:12:20)
A strong Opening Surprise

hi friends,
now watch an original new video analysis by GM Igor Smirnov
A Strong Opening Surprise by White 1.b3 (Part 2-All Black replies except e5)
at http://chessthinkingsystems.blogspot.com/


Thibault de Vassal    (2011-08-03 20:37:12)
@Don

Well, I guess that players as White do their possible to find bloody lines in order to win, as losing (even in these lines) becomes more and more unlikely due to the recent engines. But I may be wrong, are there obvious counter-examples?

Then should Black be incitated to try harder to win instead of trying to find a quick drawish line?! ... I don't know.


Thibault de Vassal    (2011-10-11 11:37:09)
Go Komi 7.5, advantage for Black/White?

A topic on the game of Go.

Someone suggested that the current FICGS Go champion should be able to decide the color of the 1st game (the WCH final match is played in 5 games) because the komi may be an advantage for White.

I'm not favourable to this idea because IMO the komi "may be" an advantage for White or Black according to the players level, and it should be about equal for top players (9p, theorically). Anyway, I guess that the champion has quite an advantage already by playing the final match only.

Any opinion on this?


Don Groves    (2011-10-12 01:05:09)
Go Komi 7.5, advantage for Black/White?

+1 ;-)


Don Groves    (2011-10-12 05:51:16)
Go Komi 7.5, advantage for Black/White?

I think we can assume the Go WCH will always be between high level players, no?


Thibault de Vassal    (2011-10-12 11:25:21)
Go Komi 7.5, advantage for Black/White?

Sure, but the komi may have a different impact on 5 dan players than on 9p ones. Actually I have no idea, maybe the top players here have an opinion on this?


Don Groves    (2011-10-12 11:41:02)
Go Komi 7.5, advantage for Black/White?

Why not leave the decision to the champion and let him/her choose? Then no one has to guess what their opinion might be. Seems a simple solution to me...


Thibault de Vassal    (2011-10-12 12:28:43)
Go Komi 7.5, advantage for Black/White?

IMO the format shouldn't depend on a player's decision. And one never know what can happen, if the champion is unreachable during a while then the games could start late or a color should be chosen by default. Doesn't look great to me.


Don Groves    (2011-10-13 00:05:36)
Go Komi 7.5, advantage for Black/White?

I surrender ;-)


Thibault de Vassal    (2011-10-14 20:56:07)
Go Komi 7.5, advantage for Black/White?

Let's just wait for more opinions on this...


Jimmy Huggins    (2011-11-28 10:38:22)
WBCCC 2 sign up and WBCCC 1 review

After an exciting WBCCC 1, Own Champion ppipper (José Sanz) wins with a finally score of 7.5 out 10. FICGS top players were in a tied for 2nd with Timothy Cookson, Sebastian Boehme, and Ruben Comes. Credit also has to go to David Evans who had ppipper as White in the last game. And went all out to beat him. In the end Jose pulled out the win with black. For those interested I highly recommend you read this article. About the champion talked about his tournament games.

http://www.chesscafe.com/chessok/chessok.htm

Now I wanted to go a head and open up the sign up for the 2nd edition of WBCCC and tell everyone about the improvements and add ons.

The first major improvement on WBCCC is that it will have a simple to use conditional move system. With our easy downloadable client we use. There is also going to be a 2nd tournament for those who prefer a little more time than own standard tournament of 30days per side. In the 2nd tournament that is going to be called Rybka Forum Grand Prix. Is going to be 30day for the first 40 moves and 30 days Sudden Death after that. So basically you get 30 more days for 40 moves on your clock. Now here is a few more things to know about the tournament. After each move, if you request it. You can have your move noticed to you by email. This is good for the busy person who doesn't check the game forums all the time. The other thing added to the tournament is that there will be a file on hand for everyone to check to see what sites everyone plays on it a head of time. This is good for guys who like to prepare for there opponent. As for other fun things offered. I finalize with chesspublishing.com that they will help for own best game per round and the winners will get there games analyzed by the top players there and will publish them on the forum. Which I can expand to here and the other forums I promote at. For some were scared of the time control, but in truth we only had 2 games time out, but this was because they left there games. Which was a disappointment, but 2 games over a whole tournament was very good! If you maybe interested, but are unsure about the time. I recommend talking to me and when can have a test game to see if you can handle it. Most know with in a week or 2 if they can do it or not. Thanks for the support of Thib and everyone that played this year and anyone that will try this next year!

Jimmy


Garvin Gray    (2011-12-13 10:09:29)
From Gambit Thematic Tournament

Thib,

Do you really mean f6 or d6 as black's second move?

Cheers,

Garvin


Don Groves    (2011-12-16 05:27:33)
Big chess art :)

What is the black defense called -- the Migrating Geese Defense ;-)


Don Groves    (2011-12-22 06:57:24)
5 player double round robins

I second Stephane's comment. If all tournaments were 5 person DRRs, tournaments would begin sooner and very likely more games would played on the site. It also eliminates any perceived white/black advantage or disadvantage.


Thibault de Vassal    (2011-12-22 18:47:03)
5 player double round robins

I agree that more regular games would be played on the site (on the white/black advantage also), but wouldn't it mean less players in the championship cycles?

It would be somewhat more difficult to control the number of total running games and IMO it's less fun also but anyway I'm ready to consider a change for the whole tournaments structure (for chess & maybe Go) if most players think it's a good idea, I'll send an email to all players about that (and other things) very soon.


Rolf Staggat    (2011-12-29 01:50:42)
5 player double round robins

4 player double round robin:
six games as usual
absolutely fair -
black and white versus each opponent


Thibault de Vassal    (2012-02-24 00:21:47)
Folding in Poker

Erratum, you all right! The last change for poker rules occured last year (february 2011):

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=forum_read&id=9557

I just lost a poker game so 12 points:

WhiteELO : 2039 ... 2051
BlackELO : 2160 ... 2148

So, yes ratings move less fast than in january 2011 but it still moves fast enough IMO. If the most doesn't agree with this we can return to the old rating rule, I'm still not sure what is best.


Rolf Staggat    (2012-08-18 17:56:35)
This is Russia :(

No sad day for me.....

This man still thinks, he is the most important person in the world.

He only went to "Pussy Riot", because he wants to be seen on TV. He hates people like the Pussies, but he thinks it is good for HIM to provocate in front of the cameras of west-medias.

He does not know, what is reality. So now some policemen have to show him, what is real. No average intelligent person would try to find that out.

He never will be president of Russia, to be against Putin does not mean to be for Kasparov.

Kasparov only thinks in "white" or "black", but there are many more colours in real life.

By the way, the Pussies would never be known outside Russia with the noise that they call music. Now they have the time to learn.

2014 number 1 in all charts:
"Pussy Riot featuring Grandmaster Garry" the new super-group with their new song "Who is the greatest idiot"

I more prefer Grandmaster Flash.....He knows about real life.


Michael Aigner    (2012-12-19 17:17:23)
The very unofficial World Championship

Final standing: 4,5 : 1,5 for H3 But finaly Cluster Rybka was able to win a game :-)

[Event "105m+15s, unrated"]
[Site "Engine Room"]
[Date "2012.12.18"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Felix 2, Houdini 3 Pro x64"]
[Black "TryMe, Rybka Cluster 64 Cor"]
[Result "0-1"]
[PlyCount "201"]
[EventDate "2012.12.18"]
[TimeControl "6300+15"]

1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 {0.34/28 249} dxe4 {0.21/23 216} 4. Nxe4 {0.33/29 0}
Nf6 {0.21/23 186 (Lf5)} 5. Nxf6+ {0.32/29 284} exf6 {0.21/24 0} 6. Nf3 {0.34/
29 154} Na6 {0.19/23 28} 7. a3 {0.34/29 122} Nc7 {0.17/24 60} 8. Bd3 {0.30/29
73} Qe7+ {0.16/24 250} 9. Be2 {0.31/31 0} Bf5 {0.18/25 261} 10. O-O {0.29/30 40
} Qd7 {0.16/25 128} 11. Nh4 {0.34/30 180 (c4)} Be6 {0.16/23 166} 12. c4 {0.28/
29 0} b5 {0.16/22 281 (Ld6)} 13. Re1 {0.27/27 197 (Lf4)} bxc4 {0.05/22 281
(Le7)} 14. Bxc4 {0.28/27 118} g6 {0.04/23 9} 15. Bd2 {0.16/28 564} Be7 {0.03/
24 0} 16. Rc1 {0.16/27 120 (Lxe6)} O-O {-0.01/22 229} 17. Nf3 {0.13/28 75} a5 {
-0.03/22 183 (Tfc8)} 18. Bf4 {0.04/25 142 (Dc2)} Bd6 {-0.15/23 370} 19. Bxe6 {
0.03/28 0} Nxe6 {-0.16/20 31} 20. Be3 {0.00/28 88 (Ld2)} Rfb8 {-0.13/21 269
(Tfc8)} 21. Qc2 {0.00/28 213} Ra6 {-0.14/23 1 (Tc8)} 22. Qe2 {0.05/26 134 (Dc4)
} Qb7 {-0.19/23 186 (Taa8)} 23. Rc2 {-0.04/28 250 (g3)} Rd8 {-0.19/23 338 (Lf8)
} 24. h3 {-0.06/26 88} Be7 {-0.20/22 47 (Lf8)} 25. h4 {-0.04/25 116 (Dd2)} Rd7
{-0.26/24 331 (Td5)} 26. Rc4 {-0.07/26 98 (Dd1)} Rb6 {-0.29/23 190} 27. Bc1 {
-0.11/30 0} Rd5 {-0.28/23 143} 28. Qd2 {-0.11/29 188 (Dc2)} Bd6 {-0.29/23 237
(Lf8)} 29. Qc2 {-0.19/25 141} Kg7 {-0.29/22 0} 30. Re4 {-0.23/24 104 (Te2)}
Rdb5 {-0.34/22 231} 31. Qd1 {-0.21/26 0 (Te1)} Bb8 {-0.43/24 269 (Th5)} 32. Qd2
{-0.26/25 82} Qd7 {-0.40/20 0 (Td5)} 33. Qc2 {-0.29/26 204 (Dh6+)} Qd5 {-0.46/
24 131} 34. Qe2 {-0.36/27 0 (Te3)} h6 {-0.68/21 127 (Lc7)} 35. Rc3 {-0.54/25
164 (Te3)} g5 {-0.91/21 121} 36. g3 {-0.81/27 326 (De1)} f5 {-1.15/22 180} 37.
Rxe6 {-0.59/29 0} Qxe6 {-1.16/22 11} 38. Qxe6 {-0.71/30 137} fxe6 {-1.08/25 0}
39. hxg5 {-0.57/29 0} hxg5 {-1.06/25 15} 40. Nxg5 {-0.57/30 53} Kf6 {-1.08/25
39} 41. Rc4 {-0.62/30 57} Rb3 {-1.08/25 32 (Ld6)} 42. Kg2 {-0.49/30 67} e5 {-1.
07/24 0} 43. Nf3 {-0.51/30 55} e4 {-1.07/25 0} 44. Ng1 {-0.48/31 98} Rd3 {-1.
11/27 56 (Ke6)} 45. Ne2 {-0.53/31 55} Ke6 {-1.08/25 0} 46. Rc5 {-0.55/30 53}
Ra6 {-1.08/26 35} 47. Rc4 {-0.52/30 37} Rb3 {-1.08/26 14} 48. Nc3 {-0.56/28 53
(Tc2)} Bd6 {-1.08/25 78} 49. Kf1 {-0.55/30 0} Ra8 {-1.16/23 58} 50. Na4 {-0.55/
29 4} Rh8 {-1.21/22 52 (Kd7)} 51. Be3 {-0.61/28 59} Kf7 {-1.33/22 17 (Kd7)} 52.
Rxc6 {-0.55/27 51} Bxg3 {-1.45/23 0} 53. Rc5 {-0.99/30 213} f4 {-1.69/26 0} 54.
Bxf4 {-0.99/28 1} Bxf4 {-1.69/26 7} 55. Rf5+ {-0.99/28 4} Ke6 {-1.67/26 7} 56.
Rxf4 {-0.99/28 0} Kd5 {-1.72/27 8} 57. Ke2 {-0.97/31 45 (Sc3+)} Kxd4 {-1.86/25
37} 58. Rf7 {-0.94/31 25} Rh2 {-2.24/24 23 (Th5)} 59. Rd7+ {-1.87/27 45} Kc4 {
-2.11/23 0} 60. Re7 {-2.01/29 103} Rbh3 {-2.53/25 0} 61. Rxe4+ {-1.86/29 61}
Kb3 {-2.58/24 0} 62. Nc5+ {-1.97/30 107 (Sb6)} Kxb2 {-2.55/24 12} 63. a4 {-2.
10/27 31} Kc3 {-2.51/24 24} 64. Re8 {-2.22/29 25 (Se6)} Kb4 {-2.78/23 53} 65.
Nd3+ {-2.30/28 0 (Sb7)} Kxa4 {-2.81/22 5} 66. Rb8 {-2.42/30 53} Rh4 {-2.98/25
0 (Ka3)} 67. Kd2 {-3.12/30 222} R2h3 {-3.30/25 0} 68. Rf8 {-3.07/28 37 (Tc8)}
Rd4 {-3.76/23 71 (Kb3)} 69. f3 {-2.94/25 14} Rh5 {-3.68/23 16 (Thh4)} 70. Kc3 {
-3.12/29 51} Rhd5 {-3.81/24 0} 71. Nb2+ {-3.21/29 34} Kb5 {-3.90/25 0} 72. Rb8+
{-3.23/30 35} Kc6 {-3.96/26 0} 73. Rc8+ {-3.31/29 48} Kd7 {-4.04/27 0} 74. Rf8
{-3.73/31 166} Rb4 {-4.38/26 0 (Ke7)} 75. Nd3 {-3.36/29 38} Ra4 {-4.21/22 0}
76. Kb3 {-3.37/29 31 (Sf4)} Rad4 {-4.24/23 14} 77. Nf2 {-3.43/31 20} a4+ {-4.
50/26 16} 78. Kc3 {-5.40/30 144} Kc7 {-7.45/27 59} 79. Ne4 {-6.34/29 75} a3 {
-7.46/25 63} 80. Ra8 {-6.34/32 0} Rd3+ {-5.11/15 2} 81. Kc2 {-6.52/32 28} Kb7 {
-12.55/22 0} 82. Ra4 {-8.77/32 122} R5d4 {-24.25/25 0} 83. Ra5 {-8.79/31 74}
Kb6 {-32.02/26 0} 84. Ra8 {-10.20/28 45} Rd8 {-61.24/26 0} 85. Ra4 {-11.82/31
46} Kb5 {-62.63/26 0} 86. Ra7 {-7.47/28 38} Kb4 {-60.64/27 103} 87. Rb7+ {-13.
80/27 0} Kc4 {-23.29/26 1} 88. Ra7 {-13.80/22 9 (f4)} Rc8 {-#18/24 351 (Te3)}
89. Kb1 {-13.79/28 24} Rb8+ {-#16/26 171 (Th8)} 90. Kc1 {-10.99/26 23 (Ka1)}
Kd4 {-#17/24 182 (Kb4)} 91. Rd7+ {-12.22/29 73} Ke3 {-#16/26 0} 92. Re7 {-12.
22/25 7} Rc8+ {-#15/29 83 (Kxf3)} 93. Kb1 {-19.95/27 10} Kxf3 {-#15/29 75} 94.
Ng5+ {-#22/35 0} Kf4 {-77.98/20 1} 95. Ne6+ {-#19/34 20} Kf5 {-#13/28 61} 96.
Ng7+ {-#19/34 23} Kg6 {-#13/29 55} 97. Re6+ {-#17/33 0 (Te8)} Kxg7 {-#12/32 135
} 98. Re2 {-#15/39 0} Kg6 {-#11/32 94 (Kf6)} 99. Rf2 {-#15/38 89 (Th2)} Kg5 {
-#11/37 108 (Tcd8)} 100. Ka1 {-#14/36 28 (Ka2)} Kh4 {-#10/39 69 (Kg4)} 101. Rg2
{-#13/36 6 (Te2) Felix 2,Houdini 3 Pro x64 gibt auf (Lag: Av=0.24s, max=0.8s)}
0-1


Garvin Gray    (2012-12-13 16:52:12)
WBCCC 2013

This information is in regards to the World Blitz Correspondence Chess Championship for the year 2013.

It is held on Rybka Forum www.rybkaforum.net.

There is a full sub forum located on that forum that explains a lot of the rules, current list of players and specifics of information.

For a general run down, read on:

My name is Garvin Gray and I am the organiser and arbiter for this event. This event attempts to bring as many strong correspondence and freestyle players together from all the different playing sites, such as iccf, ficgs, playchess, lss and many other sites.

As the title says, this is a blitz event, meaning the time controls are short compared to normal correspondence play. This requires players to devote a greater share of their focus to these games than would normal correspondence play.

This event has been held for two years now, with the 2012 version still in progress. Feel free to browse the 2012 sub forum to see the games and how the structure works.

In the two years of this event, I feel that many new discoveries have been made and advanced freestyle chess knowledge has certainly been increased, to the benefit of all. Those who have participated in both events have gained a lot from their participation and I want to see this continue.

To allow this event to start and finish in one calendar year, we start in mid January and for 2013, it will finish in mid December. The format requires that you will play one game as white and one game as black in each round. There are 10 games in total.

Each round is paired as an individual swiss using the dutch pairing rules, but accommodations are made because each person must have one white and one black game per round.

Kibitizing is allowed and encouraged, but discussions about future positions, game analysis or anything else that could affect the result of the game is not allowed. Feel free to read the thread on game commentary.

There will also be a thread for each round that allows discussion of events during the round, general discussion about games or other general chit chat.

We do seek to provide a friendly, but competitive environment for those who want to advance their freestyle skills, or test themselves against other players from the different sites. This event will take up quite a bit of your time as the time control is fast, the play is difficult and the enjoyment factor high.

This is not meant to be a deterrent, but I feel I should make it clear that you need to be dedicated and willing to play each and every game/round.

Withdrawing or timing out mid game is not acceptable and will see you removed from the event. If you think you can not complete a particular round, it is better to contact me and have you withdrawn from that round. You are free to rejoin the event in these circumstances, but will receive zero points for those two missed games.

I hope to see more entries and good freestyling to everyone.

Cheers,

Garvin Gray
WBCCC 2013 Organiser


Thibault de Vassal    (2012-12-29 22:46:10)
Chess Server Team Tournament

Well, actually many answers are in the tournament regulations...

If I understand well, each player should play from 8 games (!) to 16 games according to the number of servers participating (from 4 to 8), which is a lot...

- Is this ICCF rated? It seems that it is.

- How many boards in the teams? I read 30, which is a lot! Maybe too much.

- Will the teams play in rating order? I have no idea.


If we have players enough to enter this tournament then we can vote for a captain if several players want to be. As for me, I won't be able to play it.

The real question is who will be able to play 8 to 16 games on the ICCF server... As far as I can remember, we never found 30 players for a team event so far, without counting the forfeits.

So far, it seems that 2 servers accepted to participate while Chess.com declined the invitation.


Regulations:

http://www.mocorrchess.narod.ru/wccstc/en/regen.html

5.1. No less than 4 and no more than 8 teams to play the event. The teams represent chess servers. No one server is allowed to enter the event with no more than 1 team. Teams play each other in an each-to-each round-robin tournament.

5.2. Each team plays each team in a team match on 30 boards. Each player of a team plays 2 games (one with White pieces, one with Black pieces) with one player of the other team. Reserve players are prohibited to begin the games.

5.3. The team consists of 30 players. No more than 5 reserve players may be added in a team squad.

5.4. The games are rated for ICCF rating.

5.5. Time control is 30 days for 10 moves (with duplication after 20 days is used for a single move).

5.6. 30 days of leave per year are available for each player.

5.7. The team mates and captain can see the games live. Live transmission for public is delayed by 5 moves.

5.8. ICCF Playing rules are applied for the event. The playing rules may be seen at special page


Dmitriy Malish    (2013-01-12 16:17:34)
Progressive Chess

In progressive chess, every move is a series-move. White starts with a series of 1 move, black answers with a series of 2 moves, white answers with a series of 3 moves, etc.
White starts the game by playing one move, Black answers with two and so on, always increasing by one the length of the series. Check may only be given with the last move of a series and must be defended with the first one.
Example.
1. e4
2. e6 Bb4
Bb4 seems to be ineffective.
3. a3 axb4 Nh3
Nh3 protects f2.
4. b5 c5 d6 Kd7
At first sight Black's moves seem valid but
they leave too much room for White to operate.
5. d4 dxc5 Bg5 Bxd8 Qxd6+
White has a strong position. First, Black must move the
King, and then he needs a least three moves to eliminate
White's Queen.
6. Ke8 Nf6 Nxe4 Nxd6 Kxd8 Kc7
There were not too many possibilities left.
7. Ra6 Rxd6 Bxb5 Ba6 Na3 Nb5++
A nice mate.

What about making this game on site?


Thibault de Vassal    (2015-08-03 02:34:42)
Improving netiquette rules

Well, after a few days thinking about a complaint, I finally decided to open a topic about this public remark in game 86290 (no need to name the players again here in the forum, by the way best would probably be that they do not intervene in this discussion) :

"my engine has said ckmate in 19,but black player,maybe,prefers passing by 51 days to lose on time"

Context most probably hasn't to be known, rules have to say if it fits netiquette or not (is it insulting or not, is it subjective or not) and of course this is the question.

In other servers, this may lead to a suspension or it may not IMHO, so I'd like to gather opinions on this case, any suggestion to improve FICGS netiquette rules will be appreciated.

In my opinion, we'll have to determine if any PUBLIC remark on the use of the clock is acceptable or not and if not, what measurement to apply.


Dmitriy Malish    (2013-01-16 19:22:36)
Progressive Chess

Progressive chess is a chess variant in which players, rather than just making one move per turn, play progressively longer series of moves. The game starts with White making one move, then Black makes two consecutive moves, White replies with three, Black makes four and so on.
A check must be escaped from on the first move of a series--if this cannot be done, it is checkmate and the game is lost.
En passant captures of pawns are allowed if the pawn in question moved two squares in one move, but no further, at some point during the last turn, but the capture must be made on the first move of a series.
If ten consecutive turns are played with no captures and no pawn moves, then the game is declared a draw unless one of the players can force a checkmate (this is the progressive chess equivalent of the fifty-move rule in orthodox chess).
If at any stage a player has no legal moves but is not in check, the game is a draw by progressive stalemate.


Garvin Gray    (2013-03-14 13:48:30)
FICGS__CHESS__FREESTYLE_CUP__000005

I would like to request one change. That the event either be 5 or 7 rounds, not six.

Six rounds throws up the possibility of someone receiving 4 whites 2 blacks and other players 2 whites 4 blacks.

That is rather unfair on those who get 2/4. With 5 or 7 rounds the worst that can happen is either +1 or -1 for colour balance.


Thibault de Vassal    (2013-05-07 13:17:57)
Eros Riccio on his win in 8th chess WCH

As you may know, Eros Riccio won the 8th FICGS chess championship by beating Jeroen Van Assche (who remains undeafeated though, he did not lose a single chess game at FICGS yet) in the candidates final, preventing him to play Eros again in the final.

Eros kindly accepted to answer a few questions:


- Hello Eros. First of all, congratulations for winning this 8th FICGS correspondence chess championship. Once again, you did not even have to play the 12 games match to defend your title as you won the qualifying tournament. In these conditions, the challenge was really tough for Jeroen Van Assche, in despite of his prodigious chess. He had to beat you consecutively in the candidates final (8 games match), then in the final (12 games match). How did things go in this candidates final?

Eros: Hi Thibault, thanks again! I was also worried to have to play a very strong player like Van Assche, but fortunately I had again the advantage that all draws were enough to win, and so my strategy was again not to take risks in all my games. As White it was easy... and surprisingly also as Black. The only game where I had to be more careful than others was this one: 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.Qf3 h6 8.Be3 Qc7 9.0-0-0 Nbd7 10.Qg3 b5 11.a3 Rb8. Here Jeroen surprised me with an interesting novelty, 12.Kb1. The two times I had played this position I was White against Gueci and Kruse, and in both games I continued with 12.Bxb5 but couldn't get more than a draw. The idea of 12.Kb1 is to sacrifice a Pawn for the initiative after 12...b4 13.axb4 Rxb4 14.Nb3 Nxe4. The White Bishops are very strong after 15.Nxe4 Rxe4 16.Bd3 Ra4 17.Bd4 and fully compensate the Pawn less. Anyway I managed to defend, and when I was finally able to trade the Queens we agreed for the Draw.

- You also won the ICCF Umansky Memorial a few weeks ago, the italian correspondence chess championship (again) as well, obviously you played numerous games last year, what do you plan for the next months? By the way, Jeroen already qualified for the candidates final of the 9th cycle, meaning that he may play you in the final match next year if you defend your title again, is there a chance that we can see a revenge?

Eros: Yes, like in the past, also last year I have played a lot of games... anyway for the future I am planning to reduce my games a lot. At the moment, except a few games in minor tournaments, I am only playing for the italian colors at the Olympiads and European Championship, for ICCF. I didn't register for the new Italian Championship this time... I prefer to wait that another individual top ICCF Tournament starts. And of course I am also waiting to meet my next challenger for the FICGS Final! Maybe it will be Van Assche again, we have to see if he beats his opponent in the semifinal (actually next candidates final).

- It looks like a few chess engines reached a certain maturity, I mean algorithms. As a consequence, the computer speed may become the major evolution factor during the next years, that is generally slower than the program's improvements (but the future may have surprises, of course). What do you expect from the computer chess world in the next few years and its impact on correspondence chess?

Eros: As I have already said in a previous interview, being chess probably a draw with perfect play, the more engines get stronger, the more draws we will see. That's quite obvious.

- You probably do not play chess over the board so often, yet you have a quite good ELO! (about 2200, while many correspondence chess masters are rated below 2000 or not rated at all) By the way, I can certify that you are a strong blitz player after we met a few years ago. Do you still play tournaments?

Eros: I am not playing otb chess for a few years, my peak was 22... and a few points, I don't remember exactly. One of the main reasons why I stopped is because later, when analyzing my games with an engine... every time I got frustrated a lot seeing all the blunders I was making.

- Do you estimate that playing OTB chess is good to improve at correspondence chess?

Eros: Yes, it's useful especially if you develop a strategical style, then also in your corr. games you can see more easily "long-term-strategy" plans, which is still the "weakest strenght" in all engines.

- Do you feel that you're still improving at correspondence chess? If yes, is it mainly a question of opening book or something else?

Eros: Improving at corr. chess... hmm... I will surprise you with my thought about this matter! I think I can evaluate my strenght according to the speed of the computer I am analyzing my games with. When I bought this computer, 3 years ago, I felt like I could beat the corr. World Champion. Now... as my computer is becoming older and older, I feel like my play is getting weaker each day it passes. So my answer is that I am still getting worse at corr. chess, not improving.


Eros Riccio    (2013-05-15 18:09:28)
Eros Riccio on his win in 8th chess WCH

I started playing corr. chess in 2000 and I (should, but maybe I lost a few games) have played 780 games. Most of them were draws (447). I lost 10 games as White and 13 as Black. My latest defeat as White was in 2005 against Gino Figlio, many of you know him as he plays here too, while as Black my latest defeat was in 2009 on this server against Alberto Gueci.
How I felt when I lost? I forgot! That happened too long ago ;-P


Eros Riccio    (2013-05-15 18:41:10)
Eros Riccio on his win in 8th chess WCH

Here is the game where Gino kicked me, it was played on a server called "Chessfriend.com":

[Event "AT-2005-0-00273"]
[Site "Chessfriend.com"]
[Date "2005.08.18"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Riccio, Eros"]
[Black "Figlio, Gino"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B97"]
[WhiteElo "2480"]
[BlackElo "2154"]
[PlyCount "112"]
[EventDate "2005.??.??"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 e6 7. f4 Qb6 8. Nb3
Be7 9. Qf3 Nbd7 10. O-O-O Qc7 11. Bd3 b5 12. Rhe1 b4 13. Ne2 Bb7 14. Kb1 Nc5
15. Nxc5 dxc5 16. c4 O-O 17. g4 a5 18. Bxf6 Bxf6 19. g5 Be7 20. Qe3 a4 21. h4
Rfd8 22. h5 Rd7 23. Rd2 Qc6 24. Ng3 b3 25. a3 Bd8 26. Rdd1 Ba5 27. Rg1 Rad8 28.
Ka1 Qd6 29. Ne2 Ba6 30. e5 Qc6 31. g6 fxg6 32. hxg6 h6 33. f5 Bxc4 34. Nf4 Bxd3
35. fxe6 Rd4 36. e7 Re8 37. Nxd3 Rxe7 38. Nxc5 Rxd1+ 39. Rxd1 Qxg6 40. Qd4 Kh7
41. Nxa4 Qc2 42. Qd3+ Qxd3 43. Rxd3 Bc7 44. Rxb3 Bxe5 45. Nb6 g5 46. Nd5 Rd7
47. Ne3 h5 48. Kb1 Kg6 49. a4 h4 50. a5 Kh5 51. Kc2 h3 52. Nf1 Kh4 53. Ra3 Rf7
54. Ra1 g4 55. a6 Bd4 56. Kd3 Ba7 {White resigns.; Enddate: 12/3/2005} 0-1


Eros Riccio    (2013-05-15 18:55:23)
Eros Riccio on his win in 8th chess WCH

I have problems in evaluating chess games, how can you say if a game is good or not? To my taste, "unusual" games are the best ones. The one I am publishing is one of the first games I played, back in 2001. After a "unusual" Hyppo-Defence, it was amazing how the Black pieces coordinated for an incredible kingside attack. This is probably my favorite game:

[Event "18 C.I.M."]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2001.02.01"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Calzolari, Mario (PG)"]
[Black "Riccio"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B06"]
[WhiteElo "2107"]
[BlackElo "2025"]
[PlyCount "76"]
[EventDate "2002.11.26"]

1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nc3 d6 4. Nf3 a6 5. a4 b6 6. Bc4 e6 7. O-O Ne7 8. Re1 O-O
9. Bf4 h6 10. Qd2 Kh7 11. Rad1 Bb7 12. h3 Nd7 13. Re2 Nf6 14. Rde1 g5 15. Bh2
Ng6 16. d5 e5 17. b4 Qd7 18. b5 a5 19. Bb3 Rg8 20. Kh1 Nf4 21. Bxf4 gxf4 22.
Qd3 Nh5 23. Rg1 Bf6 24. Ree1 Rg6 25. Nb1 Rag8 26. c4 Bc8 27. Nbd2 Qd8 28. c5
Bh4 29. Ref1 bxc5 30. Qc3 Ng3+ 31. fxg3 Rxg3 32. Qc2 Bxh3 33. Rf2 Bg4 34. Rb1
Bxf3 35. Nxf3 Rxf3 36. Rxf3 Bg3 37. Kg1 Qh4 38. Qd1 Qh2+ 0-1


Thibault de Vassal    (2013-05-15 19:03:28)
Eros Riccio on his win in 8th chess WCH

Easier to watch this way...


... a funny game, indeed :)


Thibault de Vassal    (2013-05-22 01:22:46)
Eros Riccio on his win in 8th chess WCH

By the way, I didn't see the Riccio-Figlio game... here it is:




Garvin Gray    (2013-06-23 03:33:23)
Anyone play Semi Slav Botvinnik as black

I have had quite a few Semi Slav Botvinnik's on here. I play the SSB as black, but then when I am white I can not find anyone who plays it as black.

So I am wondering, are most cc'ers considering the SSB unsound for black?

I have a few ideas I would like to try as white, but never get the chance.

Maybe this could be a thematic, but would need to start after 10. Bxg5


Alvin Alcala    (2013-06-23 19:05:44)
Anyone play Semi Slav Botvinnik as black

What about in freestyle mode?


Robert Knighton    (2013-06-24 14:53:02)
Anyone play Semi Slav Botvinnik as black

it's too bad there is no way to play 1v1 unrated games at CC time controls on this site. I would gladly play a couple games like this on the side if there were.


Wilhelm Schuett    (2013-06-25 12:15:31)
Anyone play Semi Slav Botvinnik as black

http://chessage.com could be a possibility


Jose Carrizo    (2013-07-19 23:13:11)
Anyone play Semi Slav Botvinnik as black

Hi Garvin, I play Semi Slav Botvinnik as black. A thematic tournament is a nice idea.


Ilmars Cirulis    (2013-07-29 15:47:14)
Gossip about Evans gambit

Here's nice Evans game, where I played with white (at the end I made mistake and resigned):


(From http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=25194;pg=2 )


Anyone else want to share his Evans gambit CC games?


Dann Corbit    (2013-07-31 00:51:10)
Thematic tournaments?

"The unsound gambit". Black wins.
rnbq1bnr/pppp1k1p/8/8/4Ppp1/5N2/PPPP2PP/RNBQK2R w KQ - acd 35/52; acs 1558 ; acn 7330987122; ce -165 ; bm Ne5+; pv Ne5+ Ke8 Qxg4 Nf6 Qxf4 d6 Nf3 Rg8 0-0 Qe7 d4 Qg7 Rf2 Ng4 Re2 Nc6 c3 Be7 Na3 Bd7 Bd2 Kd8 Nc4 Kc8 Rf1 a6 e5 dxe5 dxe5 Bc5+ Kh1 Qg6 Ng5 Qd3 Qe4 Qxe4 Nxe4 Be7 Nf6 Rf8 Bg5 b5;


Ilmars Cirulis    (2013-07-31 12:41:09)
Thematic tournaments?




Mladen Jankovic    (2013-07-31 19:14:38)
Thematic tournaments?

I encountered it playing here, the interesting part is that it enables the black king to go on the attack early.


I've played it in game 2032, where I withdrew my king from the center even though pressing on did not seem impossible.

https://ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=2032


Ilmars Cirulis    (2013-08-01 17:00:15)
Gossip about Evans gambit

So about the thematic tournament: with black I am going to play 4... Bxb4 5.c3 Ba5 and hope to get to this position/variation:


With white I plan to play
or check my skill/luck against other retreats of bishop from b4.


Ilmars Cirulis    (2013-08-04 18:53:40)
Gossip about Evans gambit




Timofey Denisov    (2014-05-16 16:39:39)
big chess pgn viewer?

and I think would be good to develop PGN converter FICGS notation to Winboard notation (squares a0 - p15 with letter i, short notation a la "common" chess).

Sample:

[Event "Edited game"]
[Site "CHESSPC"]
[Date "2014.05.10"]
[Round "-"]
[White "-"]
[Black "-"]
[Result "*"]
[FEN "rnb1rbnqknbr1bnr/pppppppnnppppppp/7pp7/16/16/16/16/16/16/16/16/16/16/7PP7/PPPPPPPNNPPPPPPP/RNB1RBNQKNBR1BNR w KQkq - 0 1"]
[SetUp "1"]

{--------------
r n b . r b n q k n b r . b n r
p p p p p p p n n p p p p p p p
. . . . . . . p p . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . P P . . . . . . .
P P P P P P P N N P P P P P P P
R N B . R B N Q K N B R . B N R
white to play
--------------}
1. g3 d13 2. f3 Nh12 3. Njk2 m13 4. m3 Qn9 5. h3 Qxn1 6. Nn2 Qg8 7. e3 Bj8
8. f4 Bh9 9. Nj3 Nm14 10. Bk5 Nc13 11. Qo7 Nl12 12. Qxo14 n13 13. Qo4 Rpo15
14. Qg4 Qxg4 15. hxg4 Nk10 16. Nhi3 Ni9 17. Nc2 Ro7 18. d3 Nj7 19. Bl4 Rn7
20. l3 Ngi14 21. Ngh2 Bi8 22. e4 Ro15 23. Bo4 e13 24. Ni4 Be14


Ilmars Cirulis    (2014-08-27 15:27:33)
Friendly thematic games or discussions

Definitely enough that I wouldn't play it with black but in thematic games for fun.
But I can't say that it's "definitely losing". Maybe I'm too old for fast, unfounded judgements. And too busy for too frequent and big analysis. :D

Sokolsky opening is just a nice opening which I would play with white too, actually.


P.S. I wrote this post during sad mood, it wasn't claim of Traxler refutation but invitation to, probably, small talk about chess.
In these 12 days the situation has radically changed and everything is okay, even very good. :)


Alvin Alcala    (2014-12-24 16:46:08)
FICGS chess WCh summary updated

Seems black can hold.


Thibault de Vassal    (2015-01-09 20:46:20)
Eros Riccio on his win in 9th chess WCH

Eros Riccio kindly accepted to answer a few questions after his win in the 9th FICGS correspondence chess championship. Once again, his answers are worth to read... including probably a few surprises and valuable informations for most of us!

_____________________________


- Hello again Eros. Congratulations for this new win! So you played Jeroen for the second time in a row, this time in the 12 games format. There were 12 draws but it does not mean a lot. How did things go?

--> Hi Thibault! Nice to answer your questions again :-) I managed to resist again Van Assche's assaults, this time he was well-determined to win, as he made me really suffer in a couple of games. The first game was a semislav, me as Black. He played a rare variation (starting with 14.Be2 followed by 15.Qd3) that was new to me. At first the engines were giving 0.00 evaluations, but after the move 22.Qg3 they started to realize that Black's position was difficult, and they kept increasing their evaluation in White's favor move after move. That was quite a scary thing to see, and I really thought that I could have lost the game. I had to use all the thinking time (leave included) to be able to resist. This new variation impressed me so much that I decided to use it as White myself as a surprise weapon, and in fact it allowed my engine on autoplay on my old I7 980x to win a lot of games as White and a 500 dollars prize getting first place in a strong tournament on Infinity Chess. The second game was a Spanish, me as White. After his 7...0-0 I decided to avoid the Marshall (that would have probably happened if I had played 8.c3) trying the AntiMarshall variation 8.d4. I am now convinced that this variation gives nothing good to White, but I didn't know that yet when I played it! Already after the rare strong move 11...c5! things were starting to get difficult for me. He simply continued with c4 and d5, getting space advantage with his Pawns on the Queenside, while I could find no attack at all on the Kingside. Again I had to be very careful to escape with a draw.

- What can you tell about your other results this year, particularly at ICCF where you're now ranked #9 with an outstanding rating of 2639 ?

--> My ICCF elo in the past few years has raised. Slowly, but it has raised. I had no defeats and a couple of wins in the Olympiads and European team tournaments started in 2012. I am satisfied of that, as winning nowadays in top correspondence tournaments is very difficult. Important is to remain undefeated.

- Last year, you said that you felt like your play was getting weaker each day because your machine was getting older, did you finally upgrade it? But maybe this is a secret...

--> No. As I wrote earlier, I haven't updated my machine. Fortunately cpu's general speed has kept increasing not as quickly as in the past, so my I7 980x can still compete.

- Did your vision of computer chess evolve after these last 18 months? What do you expect for the next years? Do you plan to become a chess cyborg? ^^

--> Fortunately for our hobby, computer chess isn't rushing towards the "all draws" situation that I talked about a couple of years ago. That's because, fortunately, increasing cpu's power and engine's strenght is getting more and more difficult. Yes, some main lines already lead to all draws often, but chess gives so many openings options that to avoid that, you can simply play subvariations. When played a lot, also subvariations will become main variations. Then again, when the draws rate gets too high, you just pick another less played opening. It will take many years to cover every opening to a high draws rate.

- Your next challenger is Peter W. Anderson, who made a convincingly path through the round-robin cycle before to defeat SM Igor Dolgov 5-3 in the 10th candidates final (by the way he's also playing the 11th candidates final). It seems that you never played him before. How do you feel this match? Do you have any words for your opponent before that the games start?

--> I am happy to play a new player! We have just started our match, again, all my first moves as White were 1.e4. What to say... it's up to him to avoid main lines as Black (he already did it answering with 1...g6 in three games) if he wants to try to win with the black pieces. But the real challenge for him of course will be to try to win with the White pieces. It will be interesting to see if he can find holes in my Black repertoire like Van Assche was able to do. Let's wait and see!


Ilmars Cirulis    (2015-05-19 16:37:59)
Thematic Suggestion: Traxler

Yes, time flows fast. Damn. :)

Sometimes still analyzing it. I wouldn't want to play Traxler against myself. Black usually has to find draw (they can hope) in some boring endgame.


Joe Myers    (2019-06-07 00:46:11)
The 3d will not work,

Every time I try to go to the 3d it turns to the 3d board, but the board is black the peices are black and it's way too hard to see


Jan Ohlin    (2015-07-06 09:34:18)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=78874
Stalemate points as favour for black´s good opening play or white´s strong middle and endgame play?


Jan Ohlin    (2015-07-07 12:35:58)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules

Maybe the games become more interesting if instead give small extra score for win with black!? Encourage black to play for a better score, just as UEFA do in football.


Jose Carrizo    (2015-07-08 17:17:22)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules

If a player want to win with Black today, he can play Kingsindian and the Benko Gambit without new rules.


Peter W. Anderson    (2015-07-09 09:35:12)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules

I have avoided commenting further on this idea because I wanted to see what other people had to say. But now I will reply to the points made.
“Giving a bonus for stalemate is almost like playing for stalemating your opponent, which is not the aim of the game and this would change the game deeply.”
As I said I am against a points bonus, but am in favour of using stalemates for tie breaks. The real question is would someone start a game aiming for stalemate as opposed to start the game trying to win? I am not sure how you would do that – either way you have to try to build up an advantage and if it gets big enough it will lead to mate and if it is not quite big enough it might lead to stalemate. Anyone who gets the choice between a win and stalemate will presumably always take the win.
The one way I think this will really affect the game is by discouraging some very deeply analysed defences that are known to drawn or close to drawn but will almost certainly lead to stalemate. Personally I think this is a good thing, but I accept that the opposite view could be taken :)

“I think you overlooking a little that a good defense leading to stalemate means showing great skill. It´s not all about luck.”
Reaching stalemate as the defending side can be very simple (e.g. king and pawn vs king) or can indeed show great skill. It is almost never down to luck. In the case where great skill is shown that skill earns you half a point instead of no points. Nonetheless, the very fact that you needed great skill to save the game shows how close you came to losing, so I see no reason not to use this as a tiebreak rule.

“And stalemating gamepoints definitely will favour stupid engine playing and not human thinking with endgame skill”.
Like Pablo, I think quite the opposite is true. In fact one of my motivations for suggesting the change was to increase the human element in the game.

“According to me, stalemating an opponent (or having King + Bishop vs. King) reflects who played better ONLY IF rules say it before the game. In some cases, it actually reflects a better play, but in some others, it only shows that the stalemated player (or naked king) found a clever way to draw the game by giving the opponent the illusion of an advantage. Isn't it quite subjective after all?”
I have some sympathy for this viewpoint. If we could play perfect chess and at the start of the game someone decided to take the draw by allowing themselves to be stalemated then that would be a very good example supporting that view. However, I think the reality is different. In most cases when someone gets stalemated (or would be stalemated if the game was played through to its conclusion) it is because they have got a worse position and have little choice if they want to save the game.
If the defending side could achieve a draw by stalemate or by other means, then under today’s rules they could choose either way. Under my proposed rules they might be wise to choose the other method, unless of course they were confident of achieving more wins in the match.

“Maybe the games become more interesting if instead give small extra score for win with black!? Encourage black to play for a better score, just as UEFA do in football.”
This might be helpful for tournaments but I don’t think it helps at all for match play. In reality, if you can win just one game in a match you will most likely win the match. Therefore you don’t need a bonus to play for a win with black in a match situation.
However, I think this point indirectly touches on an issue with match play and how hard people try to win, and I do think the stalemate tiebreak rules would help a little with this.
The problem as it stands is that the higher rated player (or the champion in the case of the tile match) knows that if all games are drawn he will win the match. The higher rated player (or champion) can therefore take a low risk approach to the match, with both black and white (actually I think the low risk approach with white is just as much a problem).
If the higher rated player (or champion) was not certain that all draws would win them the match then they would probably try harder to win. This would give a better chance of decisive games in matches.
One way of a achieving this would be through a toss of a coin if the match is tied with all draws. Personally I would not find this satisfactory.
Whilst the likelihood of stalemate is quite low, it will nonetheless be there, so this rule might encourage the higher rated player or champion to try harder for a win.
I will speak from personal experience on this matter. In most of my recent matches I have been the higher rated player. I still play some relatively risky defences as black (e.g. the modern against 1.e4) and I always try to win with white. However, I have to be honest, if I am the higher rated player, I do not always play the very sharpest lines as white and I do not often play some of my riskier defences to 1.d4. If the stalemate tiebreak rule was in place, I would be taking more chances with both white and black.
So whilst I accept that it is not perfect, I still think the stalemate tie-break rule is a good idea. However, as nobody else has spoken out in favour of it I accept that it is very unlikely to be implemented and I won’t write any more on this matter unless someone asks me a direct question. It is time to concentrate on my matches under the existing rules! :)


Alvin Alcala    (2015-07-10 14:46:26)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules

Hi everyone. GM Arno wants to post in this thread as he has trouble logging in.
Introducing a 3/4-1/4 score for stalemate does not mean changing the whole game. Lasker and Réti, the fathers of this idea, knew quite well what they did, when they said, it's only a minor change (btw following the ancient chess, when mates were rare and a stalemated player had to pay half of his stake).
Some people on ChessBase argued and feared that the game might become bloodless as players would fear to sacrify material. But that's a wrong assessment.
Here is a "normal" classical GM game with a Morra Gambit, that could have happened the same way under the new rule:
E.Berg - S. Rocha (POR 2013)
1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 a6 7.0–0 Nf6 8.Bf4 Bg4 9.h3 Bxf3 10.Qxf3 e6 11.Rfd1 Qc7 12.Rac1 Be7 13.Bb3 Rc8 14.Nd5 exd5 15.exd5 Ne5 16.Qe3 Qd7 17.Rxc8+ Qxc8 18.Bxe5 0–0 19.Bf4 Qd7 20.Rc1 Bd8 21.Qd4 Re8 22.Qb4 Be7 23.Ba4 b5 24.Bb3 Rc8 25.Rxc8+ Qxc8 26.a4 Qc5 27.Qe1 Kf8 28.Be3 Qc7 29.axb5 axb5 30.Qb4 Qb7 31.g4 h6 32.Qd4 Nd7 33.Qe4 Bf6 34.Qb4 Qa6 35.Bc2 Ne5 36.Kg2 Nc4 37.Bc1 g5 38.Bd3 Qa1 39.Bxc4 bxc4 40.Qxc4 Bxb2 41.Be3 Bf6 42.Qc8+ Kg7 43.Qf5 Qc3 44.Qe4 Qb2 45.Qf5 Qc3 46.Qe4 Qb2 47.h4 gxh4 48.Qf4 Qe5 49.Qxh6+ Kg8 50.Kg1 h3 51.Qxh3 ½–½
Follow the comments in the MegaBase.
White sacrifies a pawn at move 3. He regains it at move 18 by a typical piece sacrifice. Later White, who is pressing a lot, while Black defends quite well, could have won a pawn by 38.b3 (instead of 38.Bd3?): e.g. 38...Qa1 39.Bxg5 hxg5 40.bxc4 bxc4 41.Qxc4.
Berg argues he might have had practical winning chances. Either 1-0 or 1/2. So what is the big difference, if we would say: either 1-0, 3/4 or 1/2? It's just making the game more exciting, more fair and a bit less drawish, what is badly needed for correspondence chess. The basic wrong assessment is that it might be significantly easier to achieve a stalemate advantage. But it isn't (and that's why only a small percentage of games will end like that). Last but not least, players who achieve a clear endgame advantage deserve a 3/4 point instead of 1/2. K+P, K+B, K+N vs. K should be a difference to K vs. K." Thanks again, Arno


Jan Ohlin    (2015-07-10 20:47:49)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules

But white can´t find the winning plan / move and yet rewarded with an extra score. Meanwhile Black defends quite well but get no additional bonus for his skills. If we compare with football, then Italy had hardly been able to become world champions, just as Tigran Petrosjan never would have been in chess.


Thibault de Vassal    (2015-07-11 02:18:11)
E. Riccio on his win in the 10th CC WCH

Once again, Eros kindly answered a few questions after his win in the 10th FICGS correspondence chess championship. His answer on tie break rules meets the discussion in this thread:

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=forum_read&id=11773

____________________________


- Hello Eros and congrats again for this new win in the FICGS correspondence chess championship! This time, your opponent was Peter W. Anderson and you're playing him once again in the next final match. Actually, all games finished in less than 3 months, which looks like superfast, how did it happen?

Hello once again Thibault! Yes, the match with Anderson was very quick. The reasons are that he moves very fast, and like me, I don't seem to remember that he took any day of leave.

Also, our games were not played until the very end; many draws were agreed with many pieces on the board, as soon as we thought that none of us had winning chances.


- For many players, it is quite impossible to beat you in such a 12 games match (probably because of the tie rule). After all these won matches do you start to think that the advantage is too big?

It's a fact that a very high percentage of correspondence games played at the top level ends up in a draw... (and that percentage is even higher in my case, as my strategy is to avoid taking risks) so yes, talking against my interests, I think that something in the rules should be changed.


- By the way, your opponent suggested an interesting tie rule in the forum ( Chess, Poker & Go forum - Topic 11773 ), in the context of more general new ideas for correspondence chess rules (e.g. article by GM Arno Nickel - Correspondence Chess – the draw problem ) in order to increase the interest of the game. Do you have any opinion on all this?

The idea GM Nickel launched could be interesting, even if before we can say for sure if it can be applied in serious tournaments, it needs to be tested.

If I understood correctly, having a piece more in a draw endgame, after the game is over, a little plus on the score would be given to the player who had the small advantage.

I always thought like: How unfair! That player had King and two Knights against a lone King of his opponent... still he only got a half point anyway! Or even worse, in theory, one player could have this position: King in e1, Bishop in h1 and 6 Pawns from h2 to h7. (Black King in h8) Counting the value of pieces that would be a a +9 advantage, like a Queen more, but still it would be a draw. Another crazy scenario, more common, are those blocked positions were 16 pawns block the center (or more simply any fortress position) and not rarely it happens that a color has a huge material advantage but can't break through in any way. In this last case the player with material disadvantage could have found a genial idea to reach that blocked position, should his opponent with extra pieces still be given an advantage after the game?

Another important consideration is that this rule could discourage attacking players to play gambits or make sacrifices, as if the attack fails, their efforts to try to win would be punished! This last case would even increase the draw rate.

Probably Nickel didn't talk about giving a plus after games finished with advantage but still many pieces on board, anyway those positions (except the 16 Pawns one) could very well be played on until only one piece would be left.

After these examples we can see that there are so many different ways that a position with material advantage can be reached... but it's not always fair that the player with the advantage should be given a plus after the game. As a paradox, an advantage should be given to the opponent if he smartly managed to sacrifice one or more pieces in order to reach a draw endgame which he would have lost if he didn't give away material.


- Of course, the level of chess programs is for much in it. Do you feel that high level correspondence chess and centaur chess evolved much this year, or did it reach a kind of peak?

The level of correspondence chess increases in a parallel way as computers, databases and chess programs improve. Slowly everything keeps improving. Of course, due to the more thinking time, correspondence chess will always have a higher draw percentage than blitz games played by computers.


- Finally, what can you tell us about your correspondence chess path this year, particularly at ICCF where you're currently ranked #13?

On ICCF I am fighting with the Italian Team (I am playing in second board behind the World Champion Finocchiaro) in the 9th European Team Championship.
---> https://www.iccf.com/event?id=44123


Pablo Schmid    (2015-07-12 02:09:18)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules

Here is most examples of my ficgs practice (corr and Advanced chess). This represent a low percentage of my games. These games are food for thought from my own assisted experience against that rule that I call "+1 decisive advantage chess". I believe you could already burn a lot of chapters in ending's book. Most of my games show balanced games until the end, sometime, the "punished guy" could have played another drawing defense, sometimes not, unfairly to me. The game would be more safe, with less sacrifices of piece vs 2 or 3 pawns and things like that because of fearing an ending with king vs king + piece or king vs king + pawn even if the sacrifice was sound and well played. Game 22895 and 84758 I would probably have been punished by the rule in the ending of game 22895 (and my opponent in the other game), and that type of ending in general (piece + pawn up vs piece when the king cannot block the pawn). Game 37122 Shame on me, my advantage in that ending was not sufficient to force my opponent to sacrifice his bishop for my last pawn. This is why I only deserve 0,5!
Game 37920 That king of pawns vs piece + pawn would become lost for the player without the piece, what a way of punish some balanced sacrifices for pawns!
Game 54907 and 20704 That kind of opposite bishop ending would be "lost" for the guy pawnless even if the transition into an inferior but drawn ending was the intention of the "inferior guy".
Game 74870 The ending is perfectly balanced but my opponent couldn't finish the game the way he did because of the rule.
Game 74875 I would have been half-losing in the pawn ending after a nice defense in an interesting unbalanced material line.
Game 74880 the ending knight + h pawn would have been "half losing" for me even if we can't say that I was clearly worse overall.
Game 76734 and 76764 Technichally this game is not directly concerned by the rule but it is very close. I was on the verge of defeat but I have managed to defend stubornely. If he have played well to get a winning position and then the win disapear because of bad play but still finish with a draw, he would get a bonus because he played better overall? The way I managed to defend would not be rewarded?
Game 77809 In this game the whole deep opening line would probably be "half losing" for Black in the ending because of the new rule.
Game 80954 Suddenly it seems that I would have been punished for my defense in the final position.
Game 85106 I did not play specially badly but... I would have been punished for my way of finishing the game!


Dann Corbit    (2016-01-07 23:52:11)
Thematic tournaments?

Analysis for BDG:
rnbqkbnr/ppp1pppp/8/3p4/3PP3/8/PPP2PPP/RNBQKBNR b KQkq - acd 37; acs 2548; bm dxe4; cce 35; ce 30; id "gentest-5125"; pm dxe4 {2629} e6 {408} c6 {293} Nc6 {16} c5 {16} Nf6 {14} a6 {1} e5 {1}; pv dxe4 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 c6 Nge2 h6 Bxf6 exf6 Nxe4 f5 Nd2 Bd6 g3 O-O Bg2 Be6 O-O Nd7 c4 Nf6 Qb3 Rb8 Qc3 Re8 Rfe1 Qd7 Rac1 Rbd8 Nf3 Ne4 Qe3 b5 cxb5 cxb5 Ne5 Bxe5 dxe5 Bxa2 Bxe4 fxe4 Qxe4; white_wins 1092; black_wins 1345; draws 800; Opening Blackmar-Diemer Gambit: Fritz Attack. ; CaxtonID: 197 ECO: D00;


Thibault de Vassal    (2016-01-19 00:25:30)
FICGS chess cup : proposal

Yes, correct. Thanks for this answer!

Isn't it a problem that in a few groups, half players take White one time more than Black? ... and some to have one game/opponent less than in other groups? (by the way, a bit harder to code/launch the games)

These points (equity) were always of first importance to me in all tournaments and I don't remember having seen this elsewhere (but I can be wrong, I'm not used to ICCF tournaments, for example). What do you think? Why is it such a problem for you to wait a few more days to "complete" a waiting list? Please note that I'm not really opposed to this idea, I just want to be sure that not all players disagree with this.


Thibault de Vassal    (2016-01-26 21:40:10)
FICGS chess cup : proposal

One more concern while writing these cup rules: Are norms fair while having one game more with white or black in tournaments? There never was the case before here.


Ilmars Cirulis    (2016-02-12 12:21:10)
Thematic tournaments?

Traxler Counterattack was mentioned because I remembered about our (me and Thibault) thematic silver games long time ago.

I don't want to play Traxler CA with Black, probably.


George Jempty    (2016-02-12 13:12:38)
Thematic tournaments?

Actually Anand was White in that O'Kelly game -- Morozevich was Black. And anyway it transposed into a Paulsen by move 6.


Thibault de Vassal    (2016-05-12 01:47:34)
Server crash (april 2016)

Dear chessfriends, I have to pause the server again to solve the emails issue (otherwise it could have bad consequences in terms of blacklisting).

Unfortunately, this is quite complicate, so it may take several days... I'll give some news here and in the chat bar.

See you soon, thanks again for your patience!


Thibault de Vassal    (2016-05-25 22:04:14)
Issues with emails after server restart

It is possible that a few players did not receive the email about the announcement of the server restart, and maybe cannot receive any email from FICGS anymore after that the server restarted. That's why I added a few days more to clocks.

A possible issue in this case is that FICGS ip was blacklisted by your email provider because of the period when the server was sending emails not authentified. It seems to work fine with Gmail, Yahoo... but it may be the case with Microsoft emails and a few smaller providers.

In this case, please send an email to info (at) ficgs (dot) com , I'll see how to fix this.


Ilmars Cirulis    (2016-05-27 13:24:37)
Random position from Traxler with Bxf7+

Black had to "cooperate": a non-optimal 11th move (probably mistake) and maybe few others too to reach this position.

But anything else is real. :P


Scott Nichols    (2016-11-11 14:01:20)
Do the cards matter?

Dear Yeturu Aahlad, I have thought long about your inquiry. This is the best scenario I can come up with.

You are at a 9 player real money game. You know all the players. You all have decided to see who is the best.

You have been playing for many, many hours. All that is left is you and Him. Lets call him Eros. Last hand.

You are dealt pocket Black Aces. Eros acts first and checks. You feel you can just take the ante's now and move on, but you decide to slow play them and just call. The flop is 3clubs, 6hearts and Qhearts. Again Eros checks and you decide to bet a little again and he calls.

Now through all the hours of playing, you have gotten to know each other well. He is the type who talks and laughs, makes fun of people, belittles them and acts in a generally arrogant manner. (We all know the type). The KEY is to study all of this and, this is maybe the most important, study his microexpressions. Some people call them tells. But most all pros know how not to give away tells. But I have learned that microexpressions are involuntary. Let's get back to the hand.

The "turn" is a Jspades. He decides to bet, a good bet and of course you call. (slow playing). Now comes the moment of truth, "the river". It is an Ace of hearts. You are thrilled, and your face gives the microexpression for a tenth of a second. You now have 3 Aces, but there is 3 hearts on the board.

All of the sudden, Eros goes all in and walks away from the table. In my experience, the odds of him having 2 hearts in the hole is 23/1. HERE is the point if the cards matter. You can beat anything except a Heart flush. And the odds of him having that are 23/1. This is a real money, no limit game. If you call and lose, you lose 90% of all you hold near and dear.

WHAT DO YOU DO?


Scott Nichols    (2017-01-06 01:11:10)
Future penalties for games lost on time

In a fairly short game #93472 it looks like black just gave the game to white. Usually this would go unnoticed. But, the white player and I have a gentelmanly bet on the outcome. he got four free points. I think they should be taken away and the black player should suffer a penalty for collusion.


Scott Nichols    (2017-01-07 15:20:42)
Defeating Draw Death

Maybe some new ideas can be shared here. Here is one, 2 players play a 2 game or even more game match where Black gives up the f7 Pawn. Or a set of the first 6 moves very wild in nature and then each player will have to play the same first six moves. They alternate colors of course, :)


Scott Nichols    (2017-01-07 15:31:58)
Defeating Draw Death

#2. Black gives up f7 Pawn, but only has to pay 2 e-points to enter, White will have to pay 10 e-points. We would have the ability to enter the tournament as White or Black.


Thibault de Vassal    (2017-01-18 03:32:56)
GM Eros Riccio 12th WCH & chess

Finally, here is a new interview with FICGS correspondence chess champion GM Eros Riccio, who gives us his (surprising?) impressions on his latest win in the championship, his current match and correspondence chess nowadays... A good matter to think about!

http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__CHESS__WORLD_CHAMPIONSHIP__000012

____________

- Hi again Eros... Once more, congratulations for winning this final match in the 12th FICGS correspondence chess championship. This time, it seems that things went quite differently than in your previous matches (you scored 9 out of 12, which is a huge performance at this level), could you tell us what happened in these games?

--> Hi, yes, finally we have seen some wins after a very long series of draws. I was surprised too, I didn't risk to lose any game and I could even win one as Black... What to say, my opponent was simply not as challenging as the previous ones.

- It's a long time since you won the previous match, would you like to tell us about your other results this year, particularly at ICCF where you now rank #9 with an outstanding 2643 rating?

--> My latest final on FICGS were my only games of 2016. On ICCF I have taken some rest, the too high draw rate didn't incentive me to start new tournaments, also because drawing all games with a high rating means losing points.

- In the next final match (13th cycle), you play Peter W. Anderson for the 3rd time... so you probably know each other's opening book quite well. What do you expect for in this match?

--> Anderson is a very tough opponent, it's not a coincidence that he reached the final for the third time. I tried to win at least one game as White, but he's incredibly hard to beat. I experimented with almost anything possible against his modern defence, but I could never find a single weakness in his repertoire. I will see what to invent this time against his terrific 1...g6.

- As you probably know, another Go champion (Lee Sedol) lost a 5-games match to AlphaGo this year, while chess engines (now Stockfish 8, Houdini 5 Komodo 10...) slowly but surely continue to improve... Still waiting for the quantum computers. How do you feel things should go in the next years? Did your way of playing advanced chess or correspondence chess change these last years?

--> I have said a lot already about the very high draw rate of the recent years... I am surprised that some changes haven't been done already, like switching to chess 960, even modifying some chess rules, or at least giving 1,5 points for one win. Otherwise a lot of players will lose interest in seeing a series of all draws in the tournaments they play. I am one of those players who lost interest in correspondence chess, and even in blitz chess, engine vs engine, as we can see the extremely high draw rate situation there too.

- Finally, what can we wish for you for the next year? :)

--> Wish me to lose the match with Anderson :-) even I got bored of seeing myself there over and over in the final! That will bring some new air and that way I can take some total rest in corr. chess.

- Many thanks for your time, have a great match!

--> Welcome, and thanks.


Scott Nichols    (2017-01-18 19:44:24)
GM Eros Riccio 12th WCH & chess

I too am bored with CC. IDK what to do either, maybe change scoring system--.9 for white win, 1.1 for black win, same with draws, 5.5 & 4.5 or something...


Jan Ohlin    (2017-01-18 20:28:39)
GM Eros Riccio 12th WCH & chess

Is there a need to distinguish between black and white? When you win a game in CC it depends first and foremost on blunders, weak play or finally you playing a position where the computer takes long time to come up with something sensible, for example in closed variation in spanish (C97, 12. d5) and therefore best player will win. Ok, winning as black requires a lot of energy for study theory, but ...?


George Jempty    (2017-01-19 00:02:36)
Defeating Draw Death

Make draws with White only count 0.4 but draws with Black count 0.6


Pablo Schmid    (2017-01-19 22:32:57)
GM Eros Riccio 12th WCH & chess

How to choose the opening, maybe random in a pre select list, or the whole small selected list, or the choice of the players like 4 choices each. For example I could ask 'I want this subline of the king's gambit" and I should not ask a too risky one because the idea is to try to win the Black(or even White) side while surviving when the color is reversed.


Pablo Schmid    (2017-01-19 22:38:48)
GM Eros Riccio 12th WCH & chess

And it could be the occasion for Thibault to see own Black would do at elite level in the line e4 Nh6 d4 Ng8 (not sure of the moves exactly but Thibault invented a thematic in this one where the Black side is rewarded for a draw)


Roger Llull    (2017-01-20 17:29:03)
GM Eros Riccio 12th WCH & chess

No, you can't mix thematic Elo with classic Elo because you are more likely to lose as black in thematic chess. What you can do is to create a separate Elo for thematic chess. Also I don't think it's good to mix thematic and classic in a championship. I stand by my suggestion to create a system to allow site users to "create" thematic tournaments using our Epoints.


Pablo Schmid    (2017-01-20 18:05:27)
GM Eros Riccio 12th WCH & chess

Why would a thematic disfavour Black? That's not logical, it just depends of the thematic! If we take the King's gambit accepred as example, Black is not worse and may be the opposite! Even if you lose as Black because of the thematuc, you have chance to win the game where you have White against it... At least the idea would be interesting to play very interesting lines and games that fear does not allow in normal time and to contribue to chess theory in wild opening.


Pablo Schmid    (2017-01-22 20:29:46)
Thematic with lowest chances of draw

King's gambit accepted. Probably most of White's gambit too, Schara-Hennig gambit as Black.


Stanislas Gounant    (2022-11-23 20:17:39)
I did not win a game since 3 years

The problem with the starting positions in FICGS thematic tournaments, one of the player can open the position and it will be draw. Some years ago, someone show me a youtube video about a game played on TCEC between leela chess zero and Stockfish.
https://tcec-chess.com/#div=sf&game=61&season=15
The engines start to play at move 7, white had more space and black can't open the position


Steven DuCharme    (2017-05-30 13:18:24)
Most Embarrassing Loss Ever...

White(me)g3 h3 Rb4 Rd4 Qb8 Kg4 Black g5 h6 Qa5 Kf6 Last move of game was B8(Q).

Resignation immediately followed. Ego crushing for me and a lesson for all.


Sergey Zemlyanov    (2017-10-09 21:55:57)
Ficgs is a money trap * BEWARE *

Hi, Thibault
A few words about the match with Riccio Eros. It seemed to me that Eros played too reliably, with a reserve of durability! However, now top-ranking OTB chess grandmasters, like Karjakin or Caruana, often play reliably too. The drawish tendencies are now visible in correspondence chess, unfortunately. To win Eros was very difficult, because of his debut choice and a power of the game, of course. Top grandmasters ICCF usually lose when they risk playing, for example, the Old Indian defense for Black.
Okay, then I donate e-points to the site and the question will be closed.
Sorry for my bad English. I do not have enough communication with foreigners.


Thibault de Vassal    (2017-12-07 16:44:05)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

It looks like there's no more month without news from Google Deepmind... This time again, this is quite stunning!

AlphaZero would have been able to beat (crush) the most recent version of Stockfish, that is also the world champion program and of course the free engine well known by correspondence chess players.

But most important is that actually AlphaZero would have outperformed Stockfish after only 4 hours of training (if I understood well), while it took 8 hours to outperform AlphaGo Lee and only 120 minutes to outperform Elmo at Shogi! However it seems much much harder for the neural program to improve at chess after this stunningly fast auto-learning.

100 games played (25 wins & 25 draws with white! 3 wins with black... no loss, either with white or black, which is an incredible performance)

All details available (must read) here: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1712.01815.pdf

http://www.sciencealert.com/it-took-4-hours-google-s-ai-world-s-best-chess-player-deepmind-alphazero

A few games played by AlphaZero against Stockfish are included in the arxiv article.




Arturas Drozdovas    (2017-12-08 21:19:34)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish

Probably not a single correspondence player would find a win as black in a game posted above :)


Daniel Parmet    (2017-12-24 18:51:20)
Monte Carlo Analysis

I thought the whole idea of IDEA was a human thought merge of computer analysis through MCA?

I had the thought about using MCA with chess engines as the brain nearly 5 years ago at work. My boss loved the idea and tasked me with it. However, I have no coding skills so my ability was limited to what was available which was extremely limited at the time.

The best way to think of MCA is to accept that we don't know what move is best (hence why Alphazero didn't have or want an opening book or games database). From here now, it's like trying to predict what's best and what will come from flipping a coin 5 million times. You know in a coin scenario that it is 50%. But what about the stock market? A lottery ticket? A game of black jack? Or Chess? Each individual decision could yield 50.1% in favor and by MCA you will find it. It will create a tree that shows a RANGE of your worst possibilities to best on a probalistic manner. The most common use is for wealth management investing.

As for how to change off the Fritz engine, I don't know. I could never figure that out (though I only have the Fritz 13 gui). I guess I was hoping this feature would be improved over time. Perhaps now due to Alphazero, it will be.


Thibault de Vassal    (2018-04-01 19:28:15)
Poll: renaming the Queen as Dragon

Ah. Interesting point... or maybe by replacing Kings by God & Evil? Hmm, no... or maybe cats.

And what about this Black & White thing? So many questions :)


William Taylor    (2018-04-01 19:36:39)
Poll: renaming the Queen as Dragon

Black and White is at least the other way round in Go. Perhaps you should switch chess to Black moving first, and Go to White moving first, for the benefit of those of us who don't play both games.
The problem with cats, of course, is that we would be leaving out dogs.


Aniruddha Duttagupta    (2018-04-07 07:43:58)
unable to play my move!

In game 102995 I can't play my move as Black.Any move played by me is shown as INVALID MOVE by the server!What to do???


Ilmars Cirulis    (2018-04-07 16:40:39)
unable to play my move!

<< Incorrect move : 7. ...Ng1, from player black. >>


Aniruddha Duttagupta    (2018-04-07 17:15:38)
unable to play my move!

But the game actually continued 7...0-0 8.Nge2 Rb8 9.bxc5 dxc5 10.0-0 b6 11.f4 the server allowed all these moves but now not permitting Black playing his 11th move.What is the solution?


Thibault de Vassal    (2018-09-24 00:15:43)
Some questions to H. Kruse, WCH finalist

After that the last FICGS chess WCH final match finished, the choice was made again to ask a few questions to Eros Riccio's challenger: Herbert Kruse, for the 2nd time. He kindly accepted to answer it so let's learn a bit more on our top-ranked correspondence chess player.

______________________________


Hello Herbert, you're not really a player to introduce as you're very active here and at several chess websites for years, with outstanding ratings in each one (as far as I know), you're the 1st FICGS CUP winner & several times FICGS WCH challenger, each time facing "the wall" Eros Riccio, what could you tell us about yourself particularly as a chess & correspondence chess player?

- i began late with 16 to play my first tournament game, but with 18 i already was kicked out of a night club in company with tony miles ;) (dresscode) had vlastimil hort as trainer for a short time and played in teams with gutman, michalchisin, klovans, gipslis and some other GMs. corr chess i began, because i love to find the truth and because of freestyle, where i began to build very strong computers


What kind of computers do you build? Is it all dedicated to chess?

- i have several dual xeon e5 computers with 64gb ddr3 and 16 to 20 real cores and they all play chess ;)


Once again, GM Eros Riccio managed to draw the 12 games of the match. What are your feelings on these games? How did you estimate your chances to destabilize your opponent in the openings and to create complications enough with White (or Black)?

- this time my feelings were neutral. 1% chances to win, but i hoped he would lose his concentration if i began more games with him (we played 6 other games at the same time)


Doesn't "1% chances to win (the match)" mean about 0.17% to win only one game with White, even when losing one with Black? Isn't it a bit pessimistic after all, or is it the new so called Riccio-effect? :)

- if the strongest players face each other there is no win possible, except some has a mouse slep or forgot something during human interfacing


When did you start playing correspondence chess and what changed since that time? What attracted you most in the game?

- 2004 and evaluation of the position is the key point of improvement since then. attractive was to be better than actual world class players :)


Could you tell us anything on the way you work chess and play your correspondence games? Any tip or secret? (nothing to lose to ask :))

- with black i play for fastest way to 0.00 and with white i try every promising way to make a game for a longer time complicated


Do you use several ones at the same time when analyzing a game? (still grabbing some tips)

- i only use the newest stockfish versions of brainfish and corchess because the other engines are not so good. because i have many games i decide which one gets the most cores and time and let them run in infinity mode until i am happy that can be after 1 week or more sometimes.


You're not far to rank 2nd as a poker player at FICGS, you obviously started to take on Big Chess as well. What other games do you play? Did you consider to play Go already?

- i played go against the german champion and lost so i quit :)) played backgammon money game and internet (in fibs with kit woolsey i played over 100 matches) in bridge i was best bidder in germany 1994 to 1995, but dont play much nowadays


Do you have specific goals to achieve as a player?

- 2 goals, since a long time: be ficgs world champion and win one german bridge championship


How do you imagine correspondence chess evolution within a decade? What kind of engines/computers do you expect to use and what will look like centaur chess according to you? (in other words, what part will remain to the human player in the decision?)

- i think the engines today are already unbeatable, so in 20 years the would still not lose and chess is dead since about 4 years


What did you think about Google Deepmind's Alpha Zero performance vs. Stockfish?

- it was a joke because they let a bad version of stockfish play. i would not have lost one game against az0 and maybe won 2 til 5 out of 100


Conditions of this AlphaZero vs. Stockfish match were very specific (opening books, unbalanced hardware...) What weaknesses did you detect in AlphaZero play?

- it was the lack of precision, what would let it lose against stockfish in its tuned newest version but i look from a view of a player who is used to play with deep 60 :)


It seems that computers did not completely take on Bridge yet, what do you expect within a decade?

- i have not seen bridge programms, but the game is so easy that it must be already mastered by computers


Zack Stephen    (2018-10-30 13:14:19)
World Championship Tie-breaks

agree with William, eros can draw these matches with his eyes closed at this point, he can easily be champion for the foreseeable future unless a format change is made.

Some other ideas for consideration: Force specific opening thematics in the final (ie each has to play black/white of a kings gambit, or other speculative openings

Don't provide the +1 day for each move. Make the games a set amount of time say 45 days for 60 moves

Make each side play BIG, random, or other variants as tie breaker until a winner is determined


Paul Larwinski    (2018-11-17 00:09:46)
World Championship Tie-breaks

there are different ways

possible to play 6 different own openings whith white and with black

longer time control would be better for thinking


George Jempty    (2019-01-19 22:33:44)
Thematic tournaments?

I propose Bishop's Gambit. If you play 1.e4 e5 as Black you probably need to know it. And if you play the same as White, it could be a good surprise weapon.


Daniel Parmet    (2020-04-28 22:59:06)
The State of correspondence chess

I have played correspondence chess now for 13 years. During that time, I have played 983 correspondence games. These days I mostly play at ICCF and some of these issues may be ICCF specific... but since ICCF has no forum and I want to get a sense of the health of correspondence chess in general... I posit my thoughts here.

First of all, I think the number of correspondence players and the number of correspondence games are decreasing across the board on all correspondence websites due to the things I want to talk about.

Second, I primarily shifted my playing to ICCF years ago for two reasons: 1) The higher level of competition available; 2) The norms available. Although I was concerned with their fees which are usually minor but, in many cases, certain organizers do construct outlandish tournaments that you need to be wary of (looking at you Venezuela).

On the first point, I think ICCF is a little more open to high caliber players competing up until a point (they really try to prevent you from playing a 2450+ player until you are 2450+ yourself). And the rating protections get tougher and tougher the further you go but they make it easy to play 2300 players. While most websites outside of ICCF, usually have one annual Cup / WCH or Thematics, these other websites usually make it impossible to play anyone more than a few hundred points above you no matter your rating outside of these few events.

On the second point, I think ICCF norms are somewhat of an illusion. They’ve always been hard and much harder to achieve than OTB norms which received a watering down of requirements of decades ago. In fact, ICCF norms are so much harder than FIDE norms that one actually needs to achieve two norms to receive the prerequisite title in ICCF vs the standard three norms required by FIDE. In the US, for example, there are 116 ICCF Titled players in history (13 GMs, 25 SIM, 78 IMs) vs 828 FIDE Titled players in present (101 GMs 166 IM 561 FMs) [https://ratings.fide.com/topfed.phtml]. Now however, there is a proposal, for the ICCF GM Title only, proposed by Dennis Doren, ICCF Rules Commissioner who really does a lot for correspondence chess, and SIM Uwe Staroske, ICCF Qualifications and Ratings Commissioner, to remove the requirement to have to play GMs to get the GM Title [leaving IM and SIM untouched] [https://www.iccf.com/Proposal.aspx?id=1280]. This proposal states, “A search of the ICCF data indicates that 21 players obtained at least 2 GM norms across 24 games but failed to get the GM title because of the requirement of "5 GM" opponents. (Only 5 of those players are currently active).†Leaving aside the fact that this proposal violates the very definition of the GM Title, one must beat the club in order to join it, the proposal further outlines the real problems without addressing them, “The GM Title has already become far harder to earn than it used to be, due to the rating suppression caused by the increase in draws.†Wow, let’s unpack that one line because it is a doozy!

Really, this one line, that is easily overlooked, is two huge problems that correspondence is facing: 1) death by one thousand draw paper cuts and 2) rating deflation. I will argue later that there is a third huge problem but let’s start with the ones acknowledged by ICCF itself. Every correspondence player knows the draw rate is going up. As engines and hardware get stronger, players are able to save positions that in the past would have been lost and we are finding ever easier ways to head straight towards 0.00 as Black. I would love to see a detailed analysis that describes how much harder it has become to win as Black against a decent correspondence player (let’s say someone 2300+). In the last five years, I have beaten three 2300+ players as Black without counting mouseslips (one in 2015, one in 2016 and one any day now in 2020) despite playing extremely aggressive openings like the KID (for the record that’s three Black wins out 103 Black draws or 2.91% Win rate). That may be part of the draw problem, but I have witnessed my own draw rate skyrocket 2014: 82.4% 2015: 86.7% 2016: 90.2% 2017: 90.6% 2018: 91% 2019 is still in progress. Often for these norms, you need to score +2, +3, +4 or +5 despite the fact that +1 usually wins the event… and with the draw rate North of 90% in a 12-13 game event that means you are likely to win 1 game on average… but in many events the entire cross table often sees one to three entire wins (look at a recently completed tournament here where I scored my first IM norm that required +0 and I scored +1). My win was one of five wins in the entire tournament 100/105 = 95.2% draw rate! [https://www.iccf.com/event?id=73482]. People love to tell me that’s fine because we are talking about such a weak event as Category 8 [2449 was the rating average]. Fine, I do not accept your argument but let’s look at the World Championship then shall we? Let’s look at the most recently concluded World Championship 30 which finished on 10/2/2019, Category 13 [2562 was the rating average]. This event was won by the new World Champion SIM Kochemasov, Andrey Leonidovich 2540 [https://www.iccf.com/event?id=66745]. Congrats to the new World Champion on his two wins! The event had 8 decisive games out 136 or a draw rate of 91.2% (not far off my own). But wait did I say SIM? I did. In fact, congratulations to the World Champion on scoring his final GM norm as well! This World Championship saw 5 SIMs compete in a field with 12 GMs. While 3 of the SIMs finished 1st 2nd and 3rd, only our new World Champion scored a GM norm. The problem is with all the draws that norms are not just becoming hard, but maintaining or increasing one’s rating is becoming hard. And one’s rating is how one receives any decent invites to have a chance at a norm in the first place.

The draws are a death by one thousand cuts as I recently played one of the ICCF’s proposal’s outlined “21 players that could have obtained a GM norm.†My rating is 2389 and his rating is 2504 (although SIM, he is recognized by all his peers as a GM caliber player). As Black, I obtained an easy draw without ever being in any trouble at all. The player had a rather angry initial discussion with me post mortem about how he felt it was wrong that a 2504 should have to play a player as weak as 2389 where the draw would kill his rating. He felt that his rating was being destroyed by these draws with weaker players and that ICCF should protect him from us. He felt I have it easier as a lower rated player because I can gain rating from these draws. Let’s look at his argument that one is causing the other and it is only happening to those 2500+. At the time that draw occurred, I gained exactly 1.17915 rating points from it (and he lost the same); however, this was the first draw in over 40 games in which I *gained* rating points (this statement is no longer true as a few higher rated players have since given me draws but at the time of the game’s conclusion this was the case). Yes, that’s right, ICCF already does such a good job of protecting higher rated players that it actively hands out advice to new players to be very particular about what invites and events they play because the draws could kill their initial rating. I too have experienced a net negative loss of rating points from draws and still seen my rating going up only due to the fact that wins are easier and ever so slightly more common to come by at my level. However, it means I am not exempt from the draw problem. It is patently false that this problem is limited to those 2500+ as in my last 43 draws, I lost rating in 42 of them and gained rating from 1 of them. Therefore, it appears draws are causing rating deflation and this is the real problem in both norms and correspondence in general. With the exception of matches, perhaps there is a way to have draws not count against one’s rating since there are so many of them? It kind of blends the Chess rating concept with that of Bridge where one cannot lose rating points once earned. What we can see is that the player’s argument that draws are causing rating deflation is probably true. One problem is at least partly causing the other one.

There is a third more devious problem worse than the two outlined above in my opinion. While rating deflation, draws, less players and norms are real issues… they are dwarfed by the change in behavior caused by these issues. I know it is a bit overdramatic to talk about such issues in a time of COVID, but there has been a great increase in the number of players playing Dead Man Defense (often shortened by correspondence players to DMD+ and DMD=). It is important to note that the death rate in COVID for those in the elderly category is markedly higher and the correspondence community in general is also markedly higher. I have heard estimates of the average age of correspondence player being 70-75 range though I haven’t seen any data. Back to DMD, what is DMD and why is it such awful behavior? The players are hoping you die before you win so they can claim either a win on time or if it goes to adjudication then at least claim a draw. The other hope is that you might mouse slip by being forced to play more moves which while that would never happen over the board does surprisingly account for a large portion of wins in ICCF correspondence high-level play. One of the main problems this issue causes is that if someone takes an early draw against a player who then goes on to die, the entire rest of the field gets a free half point and you are punished for playing your game quicker than your peers. Often, players over the board resign once mate is unstoppable or a simple endgame is reached in which the result is known to players of all levels. In correspondence, often even sooner than these players will resign or offer draws, knowing that perpetual check is unavoidable should we play another 10 moves past the piece sac against a bare king? How about when the engine reads +25 +30 or +40? So, for the most, correspondence players draw or resign much earlier than one might over the board due to engine and tablebase assistance. On that note, depending on the tournament, players can outright claim wins and draws either on the 6-piece tablebase (always allowed) or the sometimes allowed on an event by event basis the 7-piece tablebase. It is considered out right rude to make a player play all the way to the 6-piece tablebase to claim. I recently claimed one win in a six piece tablebase up an entire piece where my jolly opponent wanted to discuss the game in a post mortem (rarely done in correspondence in general anyways). I declined to even respond to him even though I was already having a very lively and fun post mortem with a Venezuelan on our extremely interesting draw. A worse example is the 92 move game I played with opposite colored bishops where I had two extra pawns. I offered a draw as white and the higher rated player to my lower rated opponent who declined it, forcing me to play to a 7-piece tablebase claim to end the game. This kind of behavior used to be quite rare. In the past, I would say it happened in 1 out of every 100 games… these days it seems to happen in every other game (1/2!). I have seven different opponents right now that are DMD+ against me where the engine reads +148 (or in some cases even sees mate! The 2504 player that complained about my rating earlier also complained someone was DMD+ him… I remarked that I have no less than 7 players DMD+ me and if they would resign? My rating would be about 2450 right which sort of eliminates his claim about our “giant†rating difference). The issue is that due to rating deflation these players need to artificially keep their rating high as long as they can because that’s how they will get their next invite. With the new terrible time control that is not yet Official (although there is a proposal to make it Official: https://www.iccf.com/Proposal.aspx?id=1282), players only need to make a move once every 50 days to pointlessly extend the game. I have a DMD= draw currently going on 16 months now where the player is just moving Kg1 Kf1 Kg1 every 50 days. This time control exasperates the DMD problem. When I contacted ICCF Officials to point out the severity of this problem, I was told that I should report it to the TD on a case by case basis only if it is DMD+ as they will not look at DMD= at all. However, it is usually the TDs that are the biggest offenders (6 of the 7 players described above were TDs). In fact, it is usually the same general casts of characters which allows for an easy black list to be created that bars these players from play until they can fix their atrocious behavior. This behavior needs to be punished. These players need to be reprimanded. In the end, lack of norms, rating deflation and the draw death will not make me quit correspondence chess. It is DMD+/DMD= that will make me quit. This experience is my personal experience with high level correspondence over thirteen years and I would love to hear from other correspondence players concerning these problems.


Thibault de Vassal    (2020-06-04 13:04:11)
chess archives in pgn

Hello Roberto,

Thanks for detailing your question here.

Yes, the "Go" function below the menu is very general and does not help much for what you would like to do.

The "Search games" option in the menu (below "Waiting lists" and "Tournaments") brings more specific ways:

Years ago, I considered that the complete PGN database was enough to build easily specific databases (player or any criteria, combinations of it, etc.) by using a database software.

Then I added a few search options, per player & per game (chess or Go), per opening, per rating (black or white) and per material for endgames... Of course, this will not replace a serious database like Chessbase.

I hope I was clear too... Does this help?


Ilmars Cirulis    (2021-03-19 19:26:41)
Berlin Defense

Why do people keep playing Ruy Lopez if there's Berlin Defense that's drawish more than enough?

I still haven't lost a game in Berlin Defense as black.


Thibault de Vassal    (2021-03-19 23:53:22)
Berlin Defense

Hmmm, it could be a nice thematic tournament soon :)

You're right actually! I searched games at FICGS, when white elo & black elo > 2300 there is no win for White since 2012 ! (and Black won regularly since then)

That's a good score for Berlin defense. To be continued.


Garvin Gray    (2021-04-02 06:08:44)
Berlin Defense

Before giving my thoughts on why white is still playing the Ruy Lopez given the drawing odds of the Berlin in correspondence chess, how many games and out of how many has black won with the Berlin?


Vadrya Pokshtya    (2022-02-17 08:52:23)
Grand Dice Chess

Hello,
I am the author and inventor of chess variants. My chess variants are published on chessvariants.com and some of them can be played on Game Courier.
I would like to present to you a variant of chess with dice that I invented relatively recently and which can already be played on two sites on the Internet.

Grand Dice Chess
The Rules

The game uses a 12x12 board.

Each player has:

4 Kings
24 Pawns
8 Knights
8 Bishops
8 Rooks
4 Queens

White and black occupy the 1st-6th and 7th-12th ranks, respectively, as shown in the diagram.
Unfortunately I can't post an image here, but you can always find it here:

https://granddicechess.blogspot.com/2022/01/grand-dice-chess.html
https://www.chess.com/blog/Pokshtya/grand-dice-chess-battle
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-variants/grand-dice-chess

White starts the game first.
The game uses four dice.
Opponents make moves alternately, throwing 4 dice. The piece to move is determined by a die:
1 = pawn, 2 = knight, 3 = bishop, 4 = rook, 5 = queen and 6 = king.

The player makes four moves at the same time based on the indications of the dice and has the right to refuse (pass) any move that does not suit him, unless it is a pawn move. Unlike in regular dice chess it's allowable to pass moves. And this rule was already applied about a thousand years ago in old variant of Shatranj (Shatranj al-Mustatîla or Oblong Chess), the Arabic pre-decessor of modern chess. However it's not allowed to pass on pawn-moves, except when they are blocked.

Chess pieces move across the board as they do in ordinary chess - according to the standard rules of move and capture.
The only minor exception is for a pawn that is not allowed to move forward two squares from its starting position.
Upon reaching the last rank, the pawn can be promoted to any piece except the king and itself.
There is no castling, check and checkmate in the game.
The goal of the game is to capture four enemy kings.

The first test tournament was held on the site http://abstractgames.ru/index.php
The tournament is attended by 10 people and I received the most positive feedback from them.
The game has proven itself so well that regular tournaments have already been launched.
Yesterday the game was added to Dagaz server https://games.dtco.ru/map
And it's a great place to test the game in person, as registering on the site is very easy and doesn't require any personal information.

The game turned out to be extremely interesting and exciting, replete with puzzling combinations. Surprisingly, with this size of the board and the number of pieces, the average game lasts no more than 30 turns.


Tim Harding    (2021-04-02 23:02:25)
Pointless To Play The Kings Gambit ?

But you said yourself you are not stopping anyone cheating, so I won't be entering another of these events I think. (Also because 90% of my games with Black I win very easily against weak opponents.) It's possible for White to avoid defeat in the KG if he chooses the safest lines but Black has a wide choice of playable defences. In some of these if White wants to have a real chance to win then he also increases the prospect of losing. I had some failed experiments in these tournaments.


Wilhelm Schuett    (2021-04-06 07:26:38)
Pointless To Play The Kings Gambit ?

there are too many good answers for black. White is fighting not to lose.


Yeturu Aahlad    (2021-04-12 19:10:42)
Poker Rating

At big chess, it is fairly common for one side - typically Black - to be down a pawn early in the game. I have had at least one opponent immediately resign. At Go, a player may blunder in a corner and immediately resign.

On the other hand, I have won many games on time and in many of those cases, the opponent didn't make any moves at all.

Perhaps a subjective challenge deserves a subjective response - I am seeing sound arguments on both sides. Suggestion - if a game concludes under 10 moves, and the winner thinks she has a genuine grievance, she can appeal for the ELO grant and a referee will adjudicate. Herbert's case is very strong. If the losing side didn't make any moves, adjudication need not be allowed, or may be automatically denied. Too many frivolous appeals from a player can lead to disciplinary action including a loss of this privilege. (I don't expect that to happen in this community)


Vadrya Pokshtya    (2022-02-19 06:11:11)
Grand Dice Chess

Thank you, Mr. Thibault!
This was facilitated by reducing the distance between the two armies to zero. Each move is a roll of 4 dice or a movement of four pieces. As soon as the pawn chain is opened, events develop at lightning speed. It is also interesting that the right of the first move is not an advantage here for the beginning side. The first games in the test tournament on one of the Russian gaming sites showed this. The balance of white and black victories is kept strictly around 50%. The game turned out to be one of the most strategic among all dice chess variants.
You can try playing against the AI ​​here

https://glukkazan.github.io/checkmate/grand-dice-chess.htm?fbclid=IwAR1Tt6sFmrK8KYRxwPPZJnrGujGss7to2jzdV8GxSons7Pmjdk7udHoJ0PA

This is a direct link to the game with the bot. Registration is not required. The bot is very weak but perfect for understanding the game.
Mr. Thibault, I would be glad if you would consider the possibility of holding a test tournament on your site. It would be interesting to see how many people would take part and what would be their opinion about the game. In any case, everyone would get an unforgettable experience.
Since I am doing this for the game and not for the money, you are free to dispose of Grand Dice Chess as you see fit on your site.
Thank you!


Patrycja Zerowska    (2022-10-06 09:54:59)
Threefold repetition

It seems that there is no way to claim a draw by threefold repetition on this site. In the game 136386, where I have Black, the position that occurred after my 50th move, is the same as that after my 58th move, and will be the same after my intended 60th move, namely 60... Bf7. I therefore claim a draw in this game.

Since apparently there is no "automatic arbiter" to process the claim, I called the "referee" on 1 October 2022 (5 days ago), explaining that I made a draw claim as described above (and mentioning my intended move), but I haven't received a reaction yet.

This particular game has been a dead draw at least since move 35. I offered a draw after my 35th move and on my 59th move. Both offers were declined.

1. Why is there no automatic arbiter which processes draw claims? If I am not mistaken, this site exists more than 15 years already, and yet the Laws of Chess are not yet fully implemented.

2. Why can't I stop my clock when I make such a claim? See art. 9.5 of FIDE's Laws of Chess.

3. Why doesn't the arbiter or the referee stop my clock? Without this, a player making a claim can timeout, or, when she is short on time, may be reluctant to make a draw claim.

4. Why doesn't the referee take action? Is there a referee at all?

In the rules section of this site I read: "Also, there is no way to stop the clocks, players cannot claim that they stopped to play after they called the referee for any reason..." This is a violation of the rules of chess; it implies that on this site it is not chess that is being played, but a weird chess variant. Of course I disagree with this corruption of the playing rules, and so should everyone who call themselves chess players!

Your strange rules also state that the referee will "act as soon as possible", but so far, after five days, no referee has shown up. So you are not even acting in agreement to your own rules.

Finally, I find in your rules the following statement: "All games are played until a player resign, accept draw, or lose on time." This is the most ridiculous "rule" I have ever encountered. Not only renders this farcical rule a win by checkmate illegitimate, it is a blatant ignoring of the Laws of Chess, which allow games to be ended by accepted draw claims, or for any other reason at the discretion of an arbiter.


Scott Ligon    (2022-11-22 14:53:59)
I did not win a game since 3 years

As for ways to address this, if engines are allowed you could have tournaments from a starting position where the game theoretic value isn't clear. Where maybe it's a win for one side or the other, or maybe it's a draw, but it's right on the border and it's not obvious which side we're on. Then you play two games from that position against each opponent, once as white and once as black.


Scott Ligon    (2022-11-22 15:22:57)
I did not win a game since 3 years

Here's another idea. We start with two pools of starting positions. One pool where white has an advantage that may or may not be winning. Another pool where black has the advantage. First player picks a position from either pool. Let's say the first player picks from the white advantage pool (on the border between winning advantage for white and draw). Second player gets to choose which side of that position they want to play. They can either play white but then they have to win, or black but then all they need to do is draw. So no matter the outcome, each match will be decisive. We'd just have to populate the pool of opening positions first.


Scott Ligon    (2022-11-22 16:25:45)
I did not win a game since 3 years

Yet another amendment. From the previous post, we can eliminate the FICGS server evaluation and let the first player stipulate which side is playing for the win. If they assign the advantage incorrectly, this only helps their opponent, so the first player has no reason to lie. Example: First player picks the King's Bishop Gambit as the starting position (1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Bc4) but erroneously claims that white has the advantage, so the second player has to choose between playing white for the win or black for the draw. Second player happily chooses to play black for the draw and should have no trouble holding the draw.


Scott Ligon    (2022-11-23 21:22:50)
I did not win a game since 3 years

Surely there are some positions where it's difficult to determine, even with engine assistance, whether the position is a game theoretic win or a draw. And then playing that position out would be interesting. That's all my proposed variant would depend on. The first player looks for a position that would be interesting to play, and if they've done their job well, the second player has a difficult task in deciding whether they want to play the side with advantage for a win or the other side for a draw. I think this would work up until the point that chess is actually solved.

The starting position could be as simple as 1. g4 (a terrible first move of course). Maybe black has a forced win and maybe with careful play white can hold the draw. If I did a lot of Stockfish analysis the answer might become clear but with a quick analysis I'm not sure. But if I knew the answer either way for 1. g4, I could always look at other positions. At least this would be a game where the outcome isn't immediately obvious.


A. T. S. Broekhuizen    (2022-11-25 10:20:51)
I did not win a game since 3 years

I think you don't have to go as far as to play dubious variations, as long as the chosen variations (for a thematic tournament) still have some 'music' left in them. I also have two suggestions: the Rio gambit against the Berlin wall and the following transposition into the Rubinstein variation of the French defence: 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 dxe4 5.Nxe4. Besides, lately I still have won a game against the King's gambit with black. But this is much harder than holding a draw with white, so I would not define success for white as a draw and for black as a win in this case.


Scott Ligon    (2022-11-25 16:20:13)
I did not win a game since 3 years

The problem with the two opening you suggested is that they're too good. Neither side made a mistake, so the engines will hold the draw every time (barring human error). The King's Gambit is a step in the right direction for a thematic tournament (with engines), and as long as everyone has an equal number of whites and blacks that's fair enough. I still think it's too easy for white to draw in the KGA with Nf3. The KGA with Bc4 is a bit more treacherous though I've explored it enough to be confident that white holds the draw. Anyway, I do think the openings need to be somewhat dubious or it's too easy for engines to draw.


Scott Ligon    (2022-11-25 17:10:39)
I did not win a game since 3 years

What does it even mean to have an advantage? Engine analysis has changed my perspective on this issue. From a human perspective, we can say that white has an advantage at the start of the game, and the statistics support this. At the highest levels of human chess white wins more often than black, but it's more often a draw. So white has a slight advantage.

From the perspective of correspondence chess with modern engines, the advantage is shown to be an illusion. It's just a draw. The engine evaluation at the start might be +0.15 or whatever, but if both sides are using an engine and there's no severe time constraint, it doesn't mean anything. By move 20 or so of a competently played correspondence game the engine analysis will have converged to 0.00 and it will stay there for the rest of the game.

In the final analysis, there's no such thing as a slight advantage. Every position is either a forced checkmate for one side or the other, or it's a draw. Even modern engines haven't pushed things that far, but they're strong enough to obliterate our human concept of an advantage.


A. T. S. Broekhuizen    (2022-11-25 17:26:08)
I did not win a game since 3 years

I am aware of these issues, nevertheless I think I could give any black player a difficult correspondence game in these two variations.


Stanislas Gounant    (2022-11-27 21:46:50)
I did not win a game since 3 years

I think it's better to play a position with players can't open the center. But i'm ok to play a thematic tournament with black and white on bishop's gambit. Rated if it's possible Thibault


Scott Ligon    (2022-11-27 22:06:35)
I did not win a game since 3 years

If you mean John Shaw's book on the King's Gambit, I have that book and he did say that the Bishop's Gambit is refuted. But he qualifies what he means: "In this context I define the term 'refutation' as Black being better in all variations, not winning by force." Not much of a refutation. If you search my game history, I have played the Bishop's Gambit several times and I haven't lost. That's why I'm confident white can hold the draw.

I'd be willing to play in that thematic tournament, and I'd be very well prepared.


Scott Ligon    (2023-08-10 00:48:11)
Next thematic tournament

The Budapest's less respectable cousin. Might just be losing for black but I'm not entirely sure. If engines are allowed, I'm interested.


Garvin Gray    (2023-08-16 14:17:48)
Next Ficgs World Championship Tournament

Thank you for starting RR 25. I think for future Wch RR's, that the RR section should be 9 players instead of 8 to ensure that each player gets 4 whites and 4 blacks.


Ilmars Cirulis    (2023-12-27 19:30:42)
Fried Liver analysis on rybkaforum.net?

I tried to browse it using web.archive.org website, but I don't remember when (which year) and where (which place in the forum) it was posted...

There was some collective analysis of Fried Liver, after some poster postulated that black is okay in this variation.

Thank you in advance and Happy New Year of 2024! :)


Scott Ligon    (2024-01-11 23:22:00)
Fried Liver analysis on rybkaforum.net?

I checked the Fried Liver with Stockfish 16, just far enough to convince myself that black can probably hold the draw. I'll post five key lines along with the eval at the end of each line, including the FEN encoding of the position being evaluated. I went through white's options and I see no way for white to improve on these lines, although 6 d4 instead of Nxf7 should also be checked. Anyway here are the line evaluations.

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5 Nxd5 6. Nxf7 Kxf7 7. Qf3+ Ke6 8. Nc3 Nb4 9. O-O c6 10. d4 Qf6 11. Qd1 Ke7 12. Re1 h6 13. Rxe5+ Kd8 14. Ne4 Qg6 15. a3 Bf5 16. Ng3 Bxc2 17. Qf3 Nd3 18. Rf5 Bd6 19. Bxd3 Bxd3 20. Qxd3 Kc7 21. Bd2 Rhf8 22. Rd1 b6 23. Bc1 Qe6
r4r2/p1k3p1/1ppbq2p/3n1R2/3P4/P2Q2N1/1P3PPP/2BR2K1 w - -
+ (0.79)

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5 Nxd5 6. Nxf7 Kxf7 7. Qf3+ Ke6 8. Nc3 Nb4 9. O-O c6 10. d4 Qf6 11. Qd1 Ke7 12. Re1 h6 13. Rxe5+ Kd8 14. Ne4 Qg6 15. a3 Bf5 16. Ng3 Bxc2 17. Qf3 Nd3 18. Rf5 Bd6 19. Bxd3 Bxd3 20. Qxd3 Kc7 21. Bd2 Rhf8 22. Rd1 b6 23. Qb1 Rfe8
r3r3/p1k3p1/1ppb2qp/3n1R2/3P4/P5N1/1P1B1PPP/1Q1R2K1 w - -
+ (0.80)

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5 Nxd5 6. Nxf7 Kxf7 7. Qf3+ Ke6 8. Nc3 Nb4 9. O-O c6 10. d4 Qf6 11. Qd1 Ke7 12. Re1 h6 13. Rxe5+ Kd8 14. Ne4 Qg6 15. a3 Bf5 16. Ng3 Bxc2 17. Qf3 Nd3 18. Rf5 Bd6 19. Bxd3 Bxd3 20. Qxd3 Kc7 21. Bd2 Rhf8 22. Qf3 Rae8
4rr2/ppk3p1/2pb2qp/3n1R2/3P4/P4QN1/1P1B1PPP/R5K1 w - -
+ (0.70)

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5 Nxd5 6. Nxf7 Kxf7 7. Qf3+ Ke6 8. Nc3 Nb4 9. O-O c6 10. d4 Qf6 11. Qd1 Ke7 12. Re1 h6 13. Ne4 Qg6 14. a3 Bf5 15. Ng3 Bxc2 16. Qf3 Nd3 17. Re2 Ke8
r3kb1r/pp4p1/2p3qp/3np3/2BP4/P2n1QN1/1Pb1RPPP/R1B3K1 w - -
+ (0.63)

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5 Nxd5 6. Nxf7 Kxf7 7. Qf3+ Ke6 8. Nc3 Nb4 9. O-O c6 10. d4 Qf6 11. Qe2 Ke7
r1b2b1r/pp2k1pp/2p2q2/3np3/1nBP4/2N5/PPP1QPPP/R1B2RK1 w - -
+ (0.44)


Scott Ligon    (2024-01-12 01:54:00)
Fried Liver analysis on rybkaforum.net?

The Lolli (6 d4) is no better for white. Black survives in the following line, and white has no other options worth checking.

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5 Nxd5 6. d4 Nxd4 7. c3 b5 8. Bd3 h6 9. Nxf7 Kxf7 10. cxd4 exd4 11. O-O Rb8
1rbq1b1r/p1p2kp1/7p/1p1n4/3p4/3B4/PP3PPP/RNBQ1RK1 w - -
+ (0.51)


Scott Ligon    (2024-01-16 20:31:54)
Fried Liver analysis on rybkaforum.net?

The Fried Liver just seems like a bad choice for black when the main line (5... Na5) equalizes, and if you want something different there's 5... b5 where white gets some advantage with 6. Bf1 but more frequently plays 6. Bxb5 where black is again equal and can expect to be more familiar with the position. I had a look at your lichess study. Are you mainly just taking notes on the computer evaluations of various lines as a general reference, or is this something you actually intend to learn in detail so you can play it?


Ilmars Cirulis    (2024-01-17 13:47:31)
Fried Liver analysis on rybkaforum.net?

Lichess study is for reference, yes. Also it's nice to have everything in one place, where it can be browsed through (and can be downloaded as PGN file, if necessary).

Yes, I agree that Fried Liver is bad choice for black. Not going to learn it for OTB, definitely.


Scott Ligon    (2025-01-21 23:17:17)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?

And now I have found a line that defeats Stockfish 17 at 10 million nodes, so that strategy is not safe to play as black. I won't post the line yet because I don't want to give away information that might be relevant for my opponents in games that are still running, but I intend to post it later.

I will continue to use the 10 million node strategy in the tournaments I had already started, but in my upcoming tournaments I will switch to the 15 million node version of this strategy, to test whether or not there's a line that defeats it. As mentioned in the first post, if Stockfish's recommended move gets to what appears to be a losing position, I will deviate from these strategies to try to avoid losing, and I will message my opponent to let them know this has happened. In my games so far, I have not deviated from the 10 million node strategy, unless it happened by mistake. But I'm not aware of any such mistakes.


Scott Ligon    (2025-02-09 21:47:17)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?

My remaining games where I'm using the 10 million node strategy as black have gone past the point where they could transpose into white's winning lines against the 10 million node strategy (at least the two winning lines that I managed to find), so I will post them now. I found both lines while analyzing games that have now finished.

Game 147097: Kruse vs Ligon
https://ficgs.com/game_147097.html

Due to a repetition, the position after black's move 22 in the game was the same as the position after black's move 20 in the following line where white wins.

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 g6 4. O-O Bg7 5. Re1 e5 6. Bxc6 dxc6 7. a4 Nh6 8. d3 O-O 9. Be3 Qd6 10. Na3 f6 11. Nc4 Qe7 12. a5 Ng4 13. Bd2 Nh6 14. Qe2 Be6 15. h4 Ng4 16. Ra4 Rf7 17. Rb1 Bf8 18. h5 Qd7 19. b3 Re8 20. Re1 Rg7 21. Rb1 g5 22. Ne1 Nh6 23. Ne3 Qc8 24. g3 Bd6 25. N1g2 Bf8 26. f3 Qb8 27. Rba1 Nf7 28. Ng4 Qd8 29. Qf2 Nd6 30. Be3 b5 31. axb6 axb6 32. b4 Bxg4 33. fxg4 cxb4 34. Rxb4 b5 35. Rbb1 Qd7 36. Qf3 Rf7 37. Kh2 Rb8 38. Ba7 Rc8 39. Bf2 b4 40. Be1 c5 41. Ne3 Nb5 42. Nd5 Qc6 43. Bd2 Nc7 44. Ra7 c4 45. Rba1 Bc5 46. Nxb4 Bxb4 47. Bxb4 cxd3 48. cxd3 Rb8 49. Be1 Rb2+ 50. Bf2 Ne6 51. Ra8+ Rf8 52. Rxf8+ Nxf8 53. h6 Kf7 54. Kh3 Rb3 55. Ra2 Ke8 56. Ra7

Game 147106: Pineda vs Ligon
https://ficgs.com/game_147106.html

First 36 moves are the same as the following line where white wins. Black got the win only because white made a mistake in entering the final move, otherwise we were headed for a draw.

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 g6 4. O-O Bg7 5. Bxc6 dxc6 6. d3 a5 7. h3 b6 8. a3 Nf6 9. Qe2 O-O 10. Nc3 Ne8 11. e5 Nc7 12. Qe4 Ne6 13. Re1 Qd7 14. Qh4 f6 15. Be3 h6 16. Qg3 g5 17. h4 Qd8 18. Bd2 b5 19. b3 Kh7 20. Rac1 Kg8 21. Rcd1 Ra7 22. Rb1 Ra8 23. Rbc1 Ra7 24. Rcd1 Rb7 25. Bc1 Ra7 26. a4 b4 27. Ne2 Qe8 28. Bb2 Qf7 29. Nd2 Qh5 30. hxg5 fxg5 31. Qe3 Rd7 32. Nc4 Rdd8 33. Ng3 Qg6 34. Nxa5 h5 35. Qe4 Qe8 36. Ne2 h4 37. f3 Nd4 38. Rf1 Bf5 39. Qe3 Ne6 40. Bc1 Qg6 41. Nxc6 Rd7 42. Na5 Rf7 43. Rde1 Rd8 44. Nc4 Rdf8 45. Nb6 h3 46. Rf2 hxg2 47. Rxg2 Qh5 48. Rh2 Bh3 49. f4 g4 50. Qg3 Ng5 51. Rf1 Bxe5 52. Nd7 Bc7 53. Nxf8 Kxf8 54. Kh1 Qh6 55. Rff2


Scott Ligon    (2025-02-15 15:43:10)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?

The position after 56 Ra7 is clearly winning if you run an analysis with Stockfish. I'm not saying it's obvious from a human perspective but if both players are using engines, black should resign at that point (and probably a few moves earler).

The move numbers don't line up with your game because I removed a repetition, but from your game if you go to the position after 22. Re1 Rg7, it's the same position as the line shown in this thread after 20. Re1 Rg7 and you can follow the line from there.


Scott Ligon    (2025-02-15 22:20:35)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?

What I'm calling the winning line is only winning if black is restricted to the strategy of Stockfish 17 using 10 million node searches, though by the end of the line it is also objectively winning. Some of black's responses when using this strategy are mistakes, otherwise white wouldn't have a winning line. 21... g5 might not be black's best response but the position should still be defensible at that point. It starts to get very bad after 27 Rba1 Nf7 which I think is black's fatal error or close to it. Prior to that black should still have some defense.


Scott Ligon    (2025-02-16 09:39:42)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?

I wouldn't draw that conclusion, but when I was looking at the 15 million node strategy as compared with 10 million nodes, I was happy to see that black switched from 2... Nc6 to 2... d6 in the Sicilian. Only because the 10 million node strategy lost in that line, so I wanted it to try something different. I would also have been happy with a switch from the Sicilian to 1 e4 e5.

It doesn't always stay with 2... d6 at higher node values either. At 19 million it goes to 2... e6 and at 20 million it's back to 2... Nc6.


Ulises Pineda    (2025-02-16 20:29:13)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?

In our game I tried to apply some psychology, reach a position that is lost for black where the engine gives a low evaluation so you don't take over the defense of the position until it's too late, too bad I was incapable of making the move I intended to play.

I'd like to request that if we ever play again and I am white and you are black, that we repeat the same game and you turn on the 10 million nodes script after I play the correct move, and we see what would have happened, while I ignore the winning line found against the script.

That's the only chance I have for all the hours of analysis I spent in our game to not go to waste.


Scott Ligon    (2025-02-17 04:20:15)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?

Here are three lines I analyzed with Stockfish. I think black should be able to hold the draw in all of them, but the 10 million node strategy makes some mistakes. Notably 54. Qf3 Bd6 is bad and black should have played Bg3 there, but apparently not bad enough to lose unless further mistakes are made. Anyway these are the lines I looked at.

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 g6 4. O-O Bg7 5. Bxc6 dxc6 6. d3 a5 7. h3 b6 8. a3 Nf6 9. Qe2 O-O 10. Nc3 Ne8 11. e5 Nc7 12. Qe4 Ne6 13. Re1 Qd7 14. Qh4 f6 15. Be3 h6 16. Qg3 g5 17. h4 Qd8 18. Bd2 b5 19. b3 Kh7 20. Rac1 Kg8 21. Rcd1 Ra7 22. Rb1 Ra8 23. Rbc1 Ra7 24. Rcd1 Rb7 25. Bc1 Ra7 26. a4 b4 27. Ne2 Qe8 28. Bb2 Qf7 29. Nd2 Qh5 30. hxg5 fxg5 31. Qe3 Rd7 32. Nc4 Rdd8 33. Ng3 Qg6 34. Nxa5 h5 35. Qe4 Qe8 36. Ne2 h4 37. Rf1 Nf4 38. f3 Be6 39. Nxf4 Rxf4 40. Qe2 g4 41. Bc1 gxf3 42. Rxf3 Rg4 43. Rdf1 Rg6 44. Nc4 Bg4 45. Be3 Rd5 46. a5 Bxf3 47. Rxf3 Bxe5 48. Nb6 Rd8 49. a6 Re6 50. a7 Bc7 51. a8=Q Rxa8 52. Nxa8 Qxa8 53. Rf1 Qe8 54. Qf3 Bd6 55. Bg5 Kg7 56. Bxh4 Be5

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 g6 4. O-O Bg7 5. Bxc6 dxc6 6. d3 a5 7. h3 b6 8. a3 Nf6 9. Qe2 O-O 10. Nc3 Ne8 11. e5 Nc7 12. Qe4 Ne6 13. Re1 Qd7 14. Qh4 f6 15. Be3 h6 16. Qg3 g5 17. h4 Qd8 18. Bd2 b5 19. b3 Kh7 20. Rac1 Kg8 21. Rcd1 Ra7 22. Rb1 Ra8 23. Rbc1 Ra7 24. Rcd1 Rb7 25. Bc1 Ra7 26. a4 b4 27. Ne2 Qe8 28. Bb2 Qf7 29. Nd2 Qh5 30. hxg5 fxg5 31. Qe3 Rd7 32. Nc4 Rdd8 33. Ng3 Qg6 34. Nxa5 h5 35. Qe4 Qe8 36. Ne2 h4 37. Rf1 Nf4 38. f3 Be6 39. Nxf4 Rxf4 40. Qe2 g4 41. Bc1 gxf3 42. Rxf3 Rg4 43. Rdf1 Rg6 44. Nc4 Bg4 45. Be3 Rd5 46. a5 Bxf3 47. Rxf3 Bxe5 48. Nb6 Rd8 49. a6 Re6 50. a7 Bc7 51. a8=Q Rxa8 52. Nxa8 Qxa8 53. Rf1 Qe8 54. Qf3 Bd6 55. Bg5 Kg7 56. Qf5 Re5 57. Qf4 Re6

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 g6 4. O-O Bg7 5. Bxc6 dxc6 6. d3 a5 7. h3 b6 8. a3 Nf6 9. Qe2 O-O 10. Nc3 Ne8 11. e5 Nc7 12. Qe4 Ne6 13. Re1 Qd7 14. Qh4 f6 15. Be3 h6 16. Qg3 g5 17. h4 Qd8 18. Bd2 b5 19. b3 Kh7 20. Rac1 Kg8 21. Rcd1 Ra7 22. Rb1 Ra8 23. Rbc1 Ra7 24. Rcd1 Rb7 25. Bc1 Ra7 26. a4 b4 27. Ne2 Qe8 28. Bb2 Qf7 29. Nd2 Qh5 30. hxg5 fxg5 31. Qe3 Rd7 32. Nc4 Rdd8 33. Ng3 Qg6 34. Nxa5 h5 35. Qe4 Qe8 36. Ne2 h4 37. Rf1 Nf4 38. f3 Be6 39. Nxf4 Rxf4 40. Qe2 g4 41. Bc1 gxf3 42. Rxf3 Rg4 43. Rdf1 Rg6 44. Nc4 Bg4 45. Be3 Rd5 46. a5 Bxf3 47. Rxf3 Bxe5 48. Nb6 Rd8 49. a6 Re6 50. a7 Bc7 51. a8=Q Rxa8 52. Nxa8 Qxa8 53. Rf1 Qe8 54. Qf3 Bd6 55. Qf5 Rf6 56. Qg5+ Kh7 57. Qxh4+ Kg7


Scott Ligon    (2025-03-29 15:42:08)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?

I played one last game using the 10 million node strategy against Pineda. The game ended in a draw, but I had to deviate from the 10 million node strategy at the end to avoid losing. I thought the finish was interesting.

https://ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=147951

The key position came after black's 56th move, and up to that point with black I am just following the 10 million node strategy. These are the moves:

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 g6 4. O-O Bg7 5. Bxc6 dxc6 6. d3 a5 7. h3 b6 8. a3 Nf6 9. Qe2 O-O 10. Nc3 Ne8 11. e5 Nc7 12. Qe4 Ne6 13. Re1 Qd7 14. Qh4 f6 15. Be3 h6 16. Qg3 g5 17. h4 Qd8 18. Bd2 b5 19. b3 Kh7 20. Rac1 Kg8 21. Rcd1 Ra7 22. Rb1 Ra8 23. Rbc1 Ra7 24. Rcd1 Rb7 25. Bc1 Ra7 26. a4 b4 27. Ne2 Qe8 28. Bb2 Qf7 29. Nd2 Qh5 30. hxg5 fxg5 31. Qe3 Rd7 32. Nc4 Rdd8 33. Ng3 Qg6 34. Nxa5 h5 35. Qe4 Qe8 36. Ne2 h4 37. Rf1 Nf4 38. f3 Be6 39. Nxf4 Rxf4 40. Qe2 g4 41. Bc1 gxf3 42. Rxf3 Rg4 43. Rdf1 Rg6 44. Nc4 Bg4 45. Be3 Rd5 46. a5 Bxf3 47. Rxf3 Bxe5 48. Nb6 Rd8 49. a6 Re6 50. a7 Bc7 51. a8=Q Rxa8 52. Nxa8 Qxa8 53. Rf1 Qe8 54. Qf3 Bd6 55. Bg5 Kg7 56. Bxh4 Be5

I ran a width 6 / depth 55 search with Stockfish 17 on the position after black's 56th move, and the top 5 moves for white along with their eval scores were:

57. Re1
+ (0.39)

57. Qf5
+ (0.37)

57. Qg4+
+ (0.32)

57. Bg3
+ (0.25)

57. Qh3
+ (0.01)

Based on that, you might think white should only consider the top 4 moves. But if we look at this from the point of view of exploiting the 10 million node strategy, here are the evaluations of those top 5 moves after the 10 million node strategy response:

57. Re1 Bd4+
+ (0.52)

57. Qf5 Bd4+
+ (0.54)

57. Qg4+ Qg6
+ (0.42)

57. Bg3 Bc3
+ (0.27)

57. Qh3 Rg6
+ (1.65)

So presumably using that logic, my opponent played Qh3 where the 10 million node strategy would require me to respond with Rg6, which loses the game. Qh3 doesn't stand out at all unless you're trying to exploit the 10 million node strategy. The actual game ended with 57. Qh3 Bd4+ and we agreed to a draw.


Scott Ligon    (2025-04-23 15:21:53)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?

My goal is to find the minimal setting where Stockfish can't be beaten, or close to the minimal setting anyway. The title of the thread shows my point of view on this issue. I think currently available versions of Stockfish with relatively modest computing power are already good enough to be unbeatable, regardless of how much money an opponent is being offered or how many supercomputers and grandmasters they have at their disposal when devising a strategy. From the starting position of a game of chess, it simply isn't that hard for modern engines to hold the draw with black. The draw rate on this very site is evidence.

I could make the task easier by generating a small opening book to keep Stockfish out of trouble in the opening, so in the case of Stockfish 17 @ 15 million nodes it might be good enough to simply dictate that it play e5 in response to e4 (I don't know if that specific example is true but it might be - I never found any trouble spots for that strategy with black outside of the Sicilian). But I want to do this with no opening book and also no access to endgame tablebases, just the engine's recommendation using a set number of nodes for the search. The settings I've tried so far fell short, but I think they weren't far off, so I'm taking only small steps forward. Stockfish 17.1 @ 10 million nodes seems like a good next step to me. If somebody finds a winning line against it, then I'll take the next step, either increasing the node count or if enough time has passed I'll move on to the next version of Stockfish.


Scott Ligon    (2025-05-01 04:14:23)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?

After the harsh words of my previous post, I must now give Pineda some credit. He did exactly what he said he was going to do against Stockfish 17.1 @ 10 million nodes so now I can't use that strategy in any of my future games, it is retired. Since none of my opponents in the games I have running now with this strategy are playing the same opening that Pineda used (the Italian Game), I can post a winning line for white immediately. Our game followed the first 43 moves of this line, and as black I had to deviate from this strategy on move 43 to avoid certain defeat. So here is a winning line for white against Stockfish 17.1 @ 10 million nodes. At the end of the line, Stockfish found mate in 22.

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. d3 Bc5 5. c3 a6 6. O-O d6 7. a4 O-O 8. b4 Ba7 9. Re1 Ne7 10. Nbd2 Be6 11. Bxe6 fxe6 12. Ra2 Ng6 13. h3 Qe8 14. Nf1 h6 15. N1h2 a5 16. b5 Bc5 17. Bd2 Rd8 18. Qb3 Qf7 19. g3 d5 20. Kg2 b6 21. Bc1 Rc8 22. exd5 Nxd5 23. h4 Bd6 24. h5 Nge7 25. Nxe5 Qxh5 26. Nef3 c5 27. c4 Nb4 28. Rd2 Ng6 29. Qd1 Nf4+ 30. Kh1 Rcd8 31. Re3 Qh3 32. Ne1 Ng6 33. Qe2 Ne7 34. Nf3 Bxg3 35. fxg3 Nf5 36. Qf2 Nxg3+ 37. Kg1 Nf5 38. Bb2 Rf7 39. Bc3 Nxe3 40. Qxe3 Qg3+ 41. Kh1 Qh3 42. Qe4 Qf5 43. Qxf5 exf5 44. Ne5 Rf6 45. Nhf3 g5 46. d4 cxd4 47. Rxd4 Rfd6 48. Rxd6 Rxd6 49. Bxb4 Rd1+ 50. Kg2 axb4 51. c5 b3 52. Nc4 bxc5 53. b6 g4 54. b7 gxf3+ 55. Kxf3


Scott Ligon    (2025-06-14 02:43:46)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?

While analyzing the game I'm currently playing as black against Pineda, I found a winning line for white against Stockfish 17.1 @ 20 million nodes. It follows the first 41 moves of that game, and white made a different 42nd move. Which may also lead to a winning line for all I know, but I will just post the one I found. At the end of this line Stockfish found mate in 23.

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. d3 Bc5 5. c3 d6 6. O-O a6 7. a4 O-O 8. b4 Ba7 9. Re1 Ne7 10. Nbd2 Be6 11. Bxe6 fxe6 12. Nf1 Ng6 13. h3 h6 14. N1h2 Qe8 15. Ra2 a5 16. b5 Bc5 17. Bd2 Rd8 18. Qb3 Qf7 19. g3 d5 20. Kg2 b6 21. Bc1 Bd6 22. Rae2 Bc5 23. Rc2 Rde8 24. Ra2 Bd6 25. Ba3 Rc8 26. c4 Kh7 27. Raa1 Kg8 28. Bb2 c6 29. Rac1 Bb4 30. Re2 d4 31. h4 Qc7 32. bxc6 Bc5 33. Rg1 Rf7 34. Qd1 Qxc6 35. Bc1 Rcf8 36. Rf1 Qd6 37. Rd2 Qc7 38. Ra2 Bb4 39. Rc2 Qb7 40. Rb2 Qd7 41. Bd2 Bc5 42. Qe2 Qc6 43. Rbb1 Nd7 44. h5 Nh8 45. Rb5 Bd6 46. Qd1 Qc7 47. Nh4 Nc5 48. Ng6 Nxg6 49. hxg6 Rf6 50. Qh5 Nxd3 51. Ng4 Qc6 52. Kg1 Qxe4 53. Nxf6+ Rxf6 54. Rxb6 Bf8 55. f3 Qe2 56. Qh2 Qxh2+ 57. Kxh2 e4 58. Bxa5 e3 59. Kg2 Ne5 60. c5 Rxg6 61. c6 Bd6 62. Bb4 Bc7 63. f4 e2 64. Rb1 Bxb6 65. fxe5 d3 66. a5 Rg4 67. Be1 Bxa5 68. Bxa5 Rc4 69. Rb6 Rc5 70. Bb4 Rc4 71. Kf2 Kf7 72. Rb7+ Ke8 73. Re7+ Kd8 74. c7+ Rxc7 75. Rxc7 Kxc7 76. Ke3 Kc6 77. Kxd3 e1=Q 78. Bxe1 Kd5 79. Bc3 Kc5 80. Ke4

Therefore I will be retiring the Stockfish 17.1 @ 20 million nodes strategy. For future games I will be using Stockfish 17.1 @ 50 million nodes.


George Jempty    (2025-06-26 23:39:19)
I did not win a game since 3 years

Yeah the only reason I'm winning in one of my games right now is because of poor play by my opponent. But 12 years ago or so I had an unbeaten streak for 2 years or so, with plenty of wins along the way (even one with Black with the Siesta variation against the Ruy) from an initial rating of 1900 or so, up to 2200+. The only reason I'm playing again now is too get some fodder for a chess opening book (about a different variation for Black against the Ruy) I've begun to write.


Scott Ligon    (2025-07-05 18:11:53)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?

For anyone looking for a quick draw with black against the 17.1 @ 50 million nodes strategy, I recommend the following line:

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Be3 Ng4 7. Bc1 Nf6

A repeat of the position after move 5, and since white's strategy is deterministic it is going to keep repeating. So as long as I'm on the 17.1 @ 50 million nodes strategy, play this line as black and you'll get a draw.


A. T. S. Broekhuizen    (2025-10-07 09:44:32)
Next thematic tournament

@George, I think it's a bit too tame. Maybe this is an idea: 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. f3 c5 5. d5 b5 after which black has several options. This is much more double-edged.


A. T. S. Broekhuizen    (2025-10-08 11:44:36)
Next thematic tournament

In the Leningrad 5.d5 is indeed suboptimal, but the lichess engine prefers 5.Nf3. After 5.e3 black has a combination with 5...Qa5 6.Ne2 Ne4 7.Qd3 cxd4 8.exd4 Nxf2 9.Kxf2 Qxg5


Scott Ligon    (2025-10-31 00:49:54)
a 2300-player tried the Budapest

I don't know if you're talking about the Budapest in the context of correspondence games, but it's playable for black, just barely. I don't think it loses by force. I have played it several times on this site.


Scott Ligon    (2025-10-31 12:46:50)
a 2300-player tried the Budapest

To make things just slightly interesting. There's no challenge at all in holding the draw with black while playing a standard opening. Modern engines make it trivially easy. But in the Budapest or the Albin Countergambit or Alekhine's Defense, I'm pretty sure black can still hold the draw, but you have to be careful.


Ulises Pineda    (2025-11-10 17:06:10)
a 2300-player tried the Budapest

Because the optimal defenses by black are so boring! And they don't offer any counter-play, specially against lower-rated opponents that could easily draw as white with those. In uncommon variations they have to think, and that's the only chance they slip.
There's also the aspect of overconfidence, chess engines have gotten so strong one thinks they can defend anything. That was a mistake I made last time I played a Benoni and lost, I thought I played the strongest defense, who knows if my opponent could also have defeated someone else in the same line, but it was a problem of evaluation, not depth, the engine was showing 1.0 scores for positions that were lost, and they were so complicated I couldn't keep up. Near the end my opponent wasn't even playing the moves I predicted and cut the game like a knife through butter.
But I'll always rather lose a game like that than playing the same boring defense that draws against anything but it's a snore fest, apparently I could just play moves from 300 million nodes blindly and draw anyway.
So I continue to play dubious lines and appreciate opponents that deviate from the norm to spice things up, I could easily be over 2300 at the cost of boring games, but I'll be getting there soon anyway and finally find out how people on that tier play against me, since I've never been able to join tournaments of that caliber.


George Jempty    (2025-11-12 16:06:48)
a 2300-player tried the Budapest

I guess for me it's kind of personal because I played the Budapest on and off for decades, even beat an IM with it in a simul, but eventually became convinced it was borderline unsound. I think you can get interesting games without playing *too* unsoundly, for instance as Black I play the Siesta


Garvin Gray    (2025-11-28 04:17:09)
New Tie Break System

Sorry, but I don't really want to participate in these discussions.

I have been through them before, even to the point of full on arguments with Thibault.

And also as National Delegate for Australia at ICCF, I have been involved in so many proposals on this topic that I have had enough of these discussions.

ICCF already has a set system and this is because it has been hashed out by all the ND's and the ICCF executive board over a number of years.

I see no point in trying to re-invent the wheel.

Talk of using different points for black wins or other criteria have also been debated in ICCF proposals and been defeated as they are unfair in the group as the player could get the win through an ETL.

And player mass resigning games without punishment is a topic that has recently been complained about on here again.

See why I don't want to discuss this topic. I have been going over these topics for almost two decades.

I am done


Scott Ligon    (2026-03-01 19:25:51)
Next thematic tournament

It does look like black is skating on thin ice in this line. These are exactly the kind of lines that might still be interesting to play in the Stockfish era, where solid openings are trivially drawn. One side or the other needs to have misplayed the opening enough to be almost losing, or possibly losing already, but in a position where this isn't clear.


Ulises Pineda    (2026-05-13 10:25:32)
Berlin Defense

What else is there to play, though? If black tries to play the Berlin and you try to avoid it, it would have been best to avoid it with the Italian. The Italian remains a landmine to this day, with Stockfish at Depth 30 showing a white advantage and Depth 40 switching to a black one, in some positions, I'd be happy to play the Italian and become black instead of being white in the Berlin!

Against lower rated opposition, the Berlin is a nightmare, it's as if they have found a way to force a draw against you, but you're supposed to try to win as Black to prove your superior playing strength.

This all makes me want to abandon 1.e4 entirely, but I haven't found a convincing line for 1.d4 (to me the Ragozin is d4's Berlin), though I have the most wins with Nf3, I think, against creative players (those that avoid mainlines for fun) 1.e4 remains the best option, they will not defend with the Berlin.

It's a thing about not playing the board, but the opponent, one that wants to win as black will not play the Berlin, and then the Ruy Lopez is the best option.


George Jempty    (2026-05-27 22:26:57)
Berlin Defense

As it turns out, the Siesta is just as drawish as the Berlin (Capablanca knew it was sound all along), but WAY more fun, especially OTB, with winning chances for both sides, but I like Black


Ulises Pineda    (2026-05-28 09:30:16)
Berlin Defense

OTB I like the Schliemann Defense against the Spanish, after 3...f5 black is completely fine and there's no winning line for white, but there are two other things. First, you can feel it in the air, Ruy Lopez players have spent a great deal of time studying it and they want to prove their superior knowledge aiming for lines where they win if black plays a small inaccuracy, which happens often and that's why they like playing it.

You take that away which is a psychological victory.

Second, they have two options, either they play fast and will most likely abandon the advantage because white needs accurate play to keep her edge, or they will sit to think on the best continuation, but after the position settles down it's equal and you come up with a huge advantage on the clock.

My favorite line is when you have your queen on d4 and they play Nxg6 because they're used to positions where capturing back allows white's queen to capture the rook on h8, only to find out they can't do that because it's protected by the queen! So they have to play Qxg6+ but after covering or moving the king black is already better!

It's as if I saw the Spanish die before my eyes like that, even if my wins are mostly on the clock, it has forced players to avoid playing it against me, because it's easier to go into some g3 and Bb2 stuff and beat me from there than figuring out how to play against 3...f5.

My only lament is its name, it would be so cool if it was the Schliemann Gambit, or Schliemann Counter-Attack or something that gives it justice.


George Jempty    (2026-05-28 12:36:54)
Berlin Defense

I used to play the Deferred Schliemann. I used to steer for a line in which the analog without 3...a6 had been played as Black by Lasker, a line involving ...Bd6. I tried it in a US Correspondence championship qualifying round in the 90s but didn't play accurately at all in the opening after that, this was a no-engines tournament (well it was the 90s anyway). But the game score made it's way into chessbase, and a Norwegian IM drew GM Sax with the line in 2005. So I was influencing theory way before the centaur/correspondence era ;) Also, in any case, I've been drawn to ...f5 lines for quite a while, I used to play the Latvian when I was a teenager, but now I've settled on the Modern Steinitz, with it's possibility for the Siesta, but I think overall is more sound than other lines involving ...f5, but still with plenty of winning chances; e.g. the Noah's Ark trap. As Black I play for a win, as White I try not to lose LOL




There are 631 results for black in wikichess.


Francisco Pessoa    (2528)
e4

King's Pawn Game refers to any chess opening where White opens with 1.e4, the most popular of the twenty possible opening moves. Since nearly all of these openings have names of their own, the term "King's Pawn Game", unlike Queen's Pawn Game is rarely used to describe the opening of the game.

King's Pawn Games are further classified by whether Black responds with 1...e5 or not.

Openings beginning with 1.e4 e5 are called Double King's Pawn Games (or Openings), Symmetrical King's Pawn Games (or Openings), or Open Games—these terms are equivalent. Openings where Black responds to 1.e4 with a move other than 1...e5 are called Asymmetrical King's Pawn Games (or Openings) or Semi-open Games.

According to Chessbase, white chances are about 57%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal, Mark Noble, Francisco Pessoa


Thibault de Vassal    (2522)
e4 c5

The Sicilian Defence is a chess opening which begins with 1.e4 c5

This is the most popular response to 1.e4 at the master level. Black immediately fights for the centre, but by attacking from the c-file (instead of mirroring White's move) he creates an asymmetrical position that leads to complicated situations. Typically, White has the initiative on the kingside while Black obtains counterplay on the queenside, particularly on the c-file after the exchange of Black's c-pawn for White's d-pawn.

According to Chessbase, black chances are about 43%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
Nf3

The Réti Opening (also called the King's Knight Opening) is a chess opening characterized by the opening move 1.Nf3

It is named after Richard Réti, a Czechoslovakian chess player who used it to defeat the world champion José Raúl Capablanca in 1924.

According to ChessBase, out of the twenty possible opening moves, 1.Nf3 ranks third in popularity. It develops the knight to a good square and prepares for a quick castling. White maintains flexibility by not committing to a particular central pawn structure, while waiting to see what Black will do. The slight drawback to the move is that it blocks the f-pawn. This is not a problem if White does not intend to move it in the near future, but it rules out the possibility of playing systems with f3 and Nge2, which is a fairly popular setup against the King's Indian.

Usually 1.Nf3 will transpose into an opening with 1.d4, such as the King's Indian or the Queen's Gambit. If White follows up with an early c4 a transposition to the English Opening may be reached. Even the Sicilian Defense may be reached if the game opens 1.Nf3 c5 2.e4.

According to Chessbase, white chances are about 57%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
e4 e5

The open game is a fight for center squares : d4 and d5 are already under control, and the probable next moves 2.Nf3 or 2.Nc3, then 2. ... Nc6 or 2. ... Nf6 will take control of e4 and e5 squares as well.

Games are often more tactical than in Sicilian opening (1.e4 c5), and requires more calculation than deep strategy. Furthermore, black chances to win are lower than in Sicilian, so I avoid to play it against computers or at correspondence chess.

According to Chessbase and correspondence chess statistics, black chances are about 43%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
e4 c5 Nc3

Closed sicilian is a strategical opening that often leads to a slow white kingside attack. Black usually fights for counterplay on the queenside. Much less played than the main line 2.Nf3, this opening is a good alternative against sicilian experts.

According to Chessbase, white chances are about 53%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
e4 e5 Nf3

King's knight opening is prefered at 90% cases.

The knight simply attacks black's e5 pawn, that is not protected yet and controls d4 and e5 squares.

By far the most played continuation is the King's Pawn Game 2...Nc6, and it is sub-divided into many familiar opening names like Ruy Lopez. Petrov's Defense, 2...Nf6, and the Philidor Defense, 2...d6, are also familiar opening names.

Some less familiar continuations of the King's Knight Opening include:

- Gunderam Defense 2...Qe7
- Greco Defense 2...Qf6
- Damiano Defense 2...f6 ?
- Elephant Gambit 2...d5
- Latvian Gambit 2...f5

According to Chessbase, white chances are about 58%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
e4 e5 Bc4

The Bishop's Opening is one of the oldest openings to be analyzed; it was studied by Lucena and Ruy Lopez. Later it was played by Philidor. Larsen was one of the few grandmasters to play it often, after first using it at the 1964 Interzonal Tournament. Although the Bishop's Opening is uncommon today, it has been used occasionally as a surprise by players such as Kasparov and Nunn.

White attacks Black's f7-square and prevents Black from advancing his d-pawn to d5. By ignoring the beginner's rule, "develop knights before bishops", White leaves his f-pawn unblocked allowing the possibility of playing f4. This gives the Bishop's Opening an affinity to the King's Gambit and the Vienna Game, two openings that share this characteristic. In fact, the Bishop's Opening can transpose into the King's Gambit or the Vienna Game, and transpositions into Giuoco Piano and Two Knights Defense and other openings are also possible. In particular, White should remain alert for any chance to transpose into a favorable variation of the King's Gambit, but with careful play Black can avoid this danger.

According to Chessbase, white chances are about 55%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
e4 e5 f4

King's gambit was the most popular opening in the 19th century. White offers a pawn to divert Black's e-pawn and build a full center with d2-d4. In order to hold the extra pawn, Black will have to spend time weakening his kingside with moves like g7-g5. It is now rarely seen at the master level, it being generally thought that Black can obtain a reasonable position either by giving back the gambitted pawn at a later time or holding on to it and consolidating defensively.

Black must decide whether or not to accept the gambit. Since White cannot easily regain the pawn if Black accepts, the King's Gambit Accepted is the most common.

According to Chessbase and correspondence chess statistics, white chances are about 54%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2512)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6

2. ... Nc6 is by far the most common and logical response to 2.Nf3, played at about 85% cases. The knight protects black's e5 pawn and controls center squares.

According to Chessbase, black chances are about 43%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6

Petrov's Defence (sometimes spelled Petroff's) has a long history, it was first popularized by Alexander Petrov — a Russian chess player of the mid-19th century. In recognition of the early investigations by the Russian masters Petrov and Carl Jaenisch, this opening is called the Russian Game in some countries.

The Petrov has a reputation of being dull and uninspired. However, it offers attacking opportunities for both sides, and many lines are quite sharp. Often a trade occurs, and black after gaining a tempo (or unit of time) gains a well placed knight. Pillsbury's game in 1896 against Emmanuel Lasker testifies to this. The Black counterattack in the center also avoids the Ruy Lopez and Giuoco Piano.

According to Chessbase, black chances are about 41%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5

The Ruy Lopez, generally called the Spanish Game outside of English speaking countries, is named after the 16th century Spanish priest Rúy López de Segura. He made a systematic study of this and other openings in the 150-page book on chess Libro del Ajedrez written in 1561 (which also included some more esoteric and what some would consider unfair suggestions, such as setting up the board so the sun shines in one's opponent's eyes).

However, although it is named after him, this particular opening was known earlier; it is included in the Göttingen manuscript, which dates from 1490. Popular use of the Ruy Lopez opening did not develop, however, until the mid-1800s when Jaenisch, a Russian theoretician, "rediscovered" its potential.

The opening is still in active use as the double king's pawn opening most commonly used in master play; it has been adopted by almost all players at some point in their careers and many play it from both the white and black sides.

According to Chessbase, white chances are about 58%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
d4 Nf6

Indian defences are characterized by the opening moves 1. d4 Nf6, although they can be reached by other move orders. These defences have a vast body of theory and have been employed by nearly all masters since the early twentieth century. They are all to varying degrees hypermodern defences, where Black invites White to establish an imposing presence in the centre with the plan of drawing it out, undermining it, and destroying it.

The Indian defences are considered more ambitious and double-edged than the symmetrical reply 1 ... d5. In the Queen's Gambit Declined, Black accepts a cramped, passive position with the plan of gradually equalizing and obtaining counterplay. In contrast, breaking symmetry on move one leads to rapid combat in the centre, where Black can obtain counterplay without necessarily equalizing first.

According to Chessbase, black chances are about 43%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
d4 d5

Queen's pawn opening is the symmetrical response to 1.d4, leading to a more passive play than 1. ... Nf6, particularly after second white move 2.c4 named as Queen's gambit.

According to Chessbase, black chances are about 42%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
d4 d5 c4

The Queen's Gambit is one of the oldest known chess openings, as Lucena wrote about it in 1497 and it is mentioned in an earlier manuscript in Göttingen. During the early period of modern chess queen pawn openings were not in fashion, and the Queen's Gambit did not become common until the 1873 tournament in Vienna.

As Steinitz and Tarrasch developed chess theory and increased the appreciation of positional play, the Queen's Gambit grew more popular. It reached its peak popularity in the 1920s and 1930s, and was played in 32 out of 34 games in the 1934 World Chess Championship.

Since then Black has increasingly moved away from symmetrical openings, tending to use the Indian defences to combat queen pawn openings. The Queen's Gambit is still frequently played, however, and it remains an important part of many grandmasters' opening repertoires.

With 2.c4, White threatens to exchange a wing pawn (the c-pawn) for a center pawn (Black's d-pawn) and dominate the center with e2-e4. This is not a true gambit since if Black accepts the pawn he cannot expect to keep it.

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Sebastien Marez    (2377)
d4 d5 c4 c6

The Slav is one of the primary defenses to the Queen's Gambit. Although it was analyzed as early as 1590, it wasn't until the 1920s that it started to be explored extensively. Many masters of Slavic descent helped develop the theory of this opening, including Alapin, Alekhine, Bogoljubov, and Vidmar.

The Slav received an exhaustive test during the two Alekhine–Euwe World Championship matches in 1935 and 1937. Played by 11 of the first 13 world champions, this defense was particularly favored by Euwe, Botvinnik, and Smyslov. More recently the Slav has been adopted by Anand, Ivanchuk, Lautier, Short, and other top grandmasters. Today the theory of the Slav is very extensive and well developed.

Black faces three major problems in many variations of the Queen's Gambit Declined (QGD).

- Development of the Black queen bishop is difficult, as it is often blocked by ...e6.

- The pawn structure offers White targets, especially the possibility of a minority attack on the queenside in the Exchange variation of the QGD.

- White often plays Bg5 to pin the black king knight on f6 against the black queen, and unpinning it is awkward for Black.

The Slav addresses all of these problems. Black's queen bishop is unblocked, the pawn structure remains balanced, and the move Bg5 is not yet threatening as the unmoved black pawn on e7 prevents the pin. Also, if Black later takes the gambit pawn with ...dxc4, the support provided by the pawn on c6 allows ...b5 which may threaten to keep the gambit pawn or to drive away a white piece that has captured it, gaining Black a tempo for queenside expansion.

On the other side, Black usually won't be able to develop the queen bishop without first giving up the center with ...dxc4, and moving this bishop may leave the Black queenside weak. White will try to dominate the center with e2-e4.

According to Chessbase, Black chances are about 43%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal, Sebastien Marez


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6

This is the second most played line in Sicilian. Reached commonly after 2. ... Nc6, logically the best move. The play is probably easier for Black than in 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 variation, but it is much harder to win against a same level player who plays Sicilian Sveshnikov. In my opinion, one should use this opening only to obtain a draw against a stronger player, and to save energy.

============

Contributors : David Grosdemange, Thibault de Vassal


David Grosdemange    (1912)
e4 e5 f4 d5

this move was considered as a refutation of the king's gambit by gm siegbert tarrasch .
this counter gambit tries to give initiative to black .

============

Contributors : David Grosdemange


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
e4 e5 f4 exf4

The acceptation of the king's gambit seems to be the best move. It is now rarely seen at the master level, it being generally thought that Black can obtain a reasonable position either by giving back the gambitted pawn at a later time or holding on to it and consolidating defensively.

According to Chessbase, black chances are about 51%

============

Contributors : David Grosdemange, Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2522)
e4 e6

The French defence has a reputation for solidity and resilience, though it can result in a somewhat cramped game for Black in the early stages. Black often gains counterattacking possibilities on the queenside while White tends to concentrate on the kingside.

The defence is named after a match played by correspondence between the cities of London and Paris in 1834 (although earlier examples of games with the opening do exist). In the early 20th century, Géza Maróczy was perhaps the first world-class player to make it his primary weapon against 1.e4. It is currently Black's third most popular reply to 1.e4, behind only 1...c5 and 1...e5. Players including Viktor Korchnoi, Mikhail Botvinnik, Wolfgang Uhlmann and Nigel Short have been particularly fond of it. More recently, the defence has featured strongly in the opening repertoires of Evgeny Bareev, Alexander Khalifman, Alexander Morozevich, and Teimour Radjabov.

According to chessbase, black chances are about 43%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal, Toncho Tenev


Sebastien Marez    (2377)
e4 c6

The Caro-Kann, like the Sicilian Defense and French Defense, is classified as a "semi-open game", but it is thought to be more passive and drawish than either of those openings.

The opening is named after the German players Horatio Caro and Marcus Kann who analyzed the opening in 1886.

According to Chessbase, black chances are about 43%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal, Sebastien Marez


Tryfon Gavriel    (2164)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4

By far the most popular move, in order to take the control of the d4-square.

The change in pawn structure after cxd4 has a profound effect on the plans for both sides. Black in the Siclian defence will often aim to exploit the semi-open c file.
============

Contributors : Julien Coll, Tryfon Gavriel


Julien Coll    (1400)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4


Black permits the free installation of a knight in d4 but in return he can use the semi-open c-file and he has more pawns to use than white for a possible fight for centre control.
============

Contributors : Julien Coll


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
f4 e5

This opening is called From's Gambit. White can then transpose into the King's Gambit with 2.e4. If White wants to stay in the Bird's Opening play can continue 2.fxe5 d6 (2...Nc6 is also possible) 3.exd6 Bxd6. Now White must play 4.Nf3 (and if 4...g5, either 5.g3 g4 6.Nh4 or 5.d4 g4 6.Ne5) or 4.g3, avoiding 4.Nc3?? Qh4+ 5.g3 Qxg3+ 5.hxg3 Bxg3 checkmate.

This gambit can give Black an overwhelming attack if White goes wrong, but even if White plays accurately Black still has some attacking chances. From's Gambit is named after the Danish chess player Severin From (1828–1895).

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Daniel Barrish    (2000)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6

Here we've reached the initial position of the famous Sicilian Dragon. For those who are interested in astronomy, its name refers to the black pawn structure d6-e7-f7-g6-h7, which has resemblance with the Dragon Constellation.
Usually White has (generally speaking, of course) two ways at his disposal:
-quiet positional play by castling short, in order to put some positional pressure thanks to his slight space advantage.
-sharp play by castling long, and simultaneous king's attack for both sides, which often leads to real bloodbaths.
============
There are 2 main ways for white to play here: The "passive" classical and minor variations and the aggresive yugoslav attack. the yugoslav has been proven much better
Contributors : Julien Coll, Daniel Barrish


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
e4 Nf6

Alekhine's Defence is named after Alexander Alekhine who first used it in two games in the 1921 Budapest tournament: one against Andre Steiner (which he won) and the other against Fritz Sämisch (which he drew). Another early exponent of the defence was Ernst Grünfeld. The opening is considered hypermodern because Black provokes White to attack Black's knight and occupy the centre with his pawns, hoping to prove that White's imposing mass of pawns in the centre (which often includes pawns on c4, d4, e5, and f4) is in fact weak.

According to Chessbase, black chances are about 39%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6

This move is played in about half games, leading to the famous Nimzo-Indian and Bogo-Indian defenses. It allows the black-squares bishop to enter in action quickly (castling usually follows) and to control the d5 center square.

According to Chessbase, black chances are about 43%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4

The Nimzo-Indian Defence is a hypermodern opening, developed by Grandmaster Aaron Nimzowitsch who introduced it to master-level chess in the early 20th century. Unlike most Indian openings the Nimzo-Indian does not involve an immediate fianchetto, although Black often follows up with ...b6 and ...Bb7. By pinning White's knight Black prevents the threatened 4.e4 and seeks to inflict doubled pawns on White. White will attempt to create a pawn centre and develop his pieces to prepare for an assault on the Black position.

According to Chessbase, black chances are about 43%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6

Since White's third move 3.Nf3, a move commonly played to avoid the Nimzo-Indian Defence, does not threaten to occupy the centre with 4.e4, Black has the option of playing 3...b6, called Queen's Indian Defense.

The play in the Queen's Indian is similar to that of the Nimzo-Indian. The opening is considered a hypermodern one, since Black does not strive to occupy the centre with his pawns immediately. Instead he intends to fianchetto his queen's bishop and put pressure on the e4-square in order to prevent White from occupying that square. With the White centre restrained Black intends to attack it. As in most other hypermodern openings, White will attempt to solidify his centre, prove that it is strong, not weak, and use his advantage in space to crush Black.

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 d5

This move transposes in queen's gambit lines. Not much more to say about it. See the queen's gambit openings.

According to Chessbase, black chances are about 43%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 Bb4+

The Bogo-Indian Defence, named after Efim Bogoljubov, is not so popular as the Queen's Indian, but is occasionally seen at all levels.

According to Chessbase, black chances are about 41%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6

The King's Indian Defence is a chess opening that begins 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 followed by ...Bg7 and ...d6. The King's Indian is a "hypermodern" opening, where Black lets White take the center with the view to later ruining White's "wonderful" position, often by an attack on White's king. It is a risky opening, which has been a favourite of players such as former world champions Garry Kasparov, Bobby Fischer and Tigran Petrosian. Prominent grandmasters John Nunn, Svetozar Gligoric, Wolfgang Uhlmann, and Larry Christiansen have also played this opening frequently.

According to Chessbase, black chances are about 42%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4

The Scotch Game received its name from a correspondence match in 1824 between Edinburgh and London. Popular in the 19th century, by 1900 the Scotch had lost favor among top players because it was thought to release the central tension too early and allow Black to equalize without difficulty. More recently the Scotch has regained some popularity and it has been used by grandmasters Kasparov and Timman as a surprise weapon to avoid the well-analyzed Ruy Lopez.

According to Chessbase, white chances are about 57%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
g3

The King's Indian Attack (KIA) can be reached by different routes (usually by 1.e4, 1.Nf3 or 1.g3). Often the KIA is reached via 1.e4 followed by d3, Nd2, Ngf3, g3, Bg2, and 0-0, an example being 1.e4 e6 2.d3 (this is possible against almost any opening move -- 1...c6, 1...c5, etc.) d5 3.Nd2 followed by Ngf3, etc.

Since the KIA is a closed, strategic opening choice, many 1.e4 players prefer to play sharper, more open variations. When played after 1.e4, the KIA is most often used against the semi-open defences where Black responds asymmetrically to e4, such as the French Defence, Sicilian Defence, Caro-Kann Defence, etc. The KIA is less often played against 1.e4 e5, where most White players prefer to play more aggressive lines such as the Ruy Lopez.

The King's Indian attack is considered to be one of the most solid opening choices for White, but not very aggressive. It is similar to the King's Indian Defense with colors reversed. White's plan is usually to either push the d and e pawns up a rank as the game progresses in order to bind the opponent. If Black castles king-side, White often follows up with h4 and a king-side pawn storm, placing his king at h1 if needed. If Black castles queen-side, White can move his knight to c4 and attack on the queen-side.

According to Chessbase, white chances are about 55%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Bc5

The Giuoco Piano (Italian: "quiet game"), is the oldest recorded opening. The Portuguese Damiano played it at the beginning of the 15th century and the Italian Greco played it at the beginning of the 16th century. Because of Greco's work on the opening, it is sometimes called the Italian Game, although that term is also used more generally to describe the position after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4. The Giuoco Piano was popular through the 19th century, but modern refinements in defensive play have led most chess masters towards openings like the Ruy Lopez that offer White greater chances for long term initiative.

White's "Italian bishop" at c4 prevents Black from advancing in the center with ...d5 and attacks the vulnerable f7 square. White plans to dominate the center with d2-d4 and to attack the Black king. Black aims to free his game by exchanging pieces and playing the pawn break ...d5, or to hold his center pawn at e5.

According to Chessbase, white chances are about 46%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Bc5 b4

The gambit is named after Captain William Davies Evans, the first player known to have employed it. The first game with the opening is considered to be Evans - McDonnell, London 1827, although in that game a slightly different move order was tried (1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. O-O d6 and only now 5. b4). The gambit became very popular shortly after that, being employed a number of times in the series of games between McDonnell and Louis de la Bourdonnais in 1834. Players such as Adolf Anderssen, Paul Morphy and Mikhail Chigorin subsequently took it up. It was out of favour for much of the 20th century, although John Nunn and Jan Timman played some games with it in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and in the 1990s Garry Kasparov used it in a few of his games (notably a famous 25-move win against Viswanathan Anand in Riga, 1995), which prompted a brief revival of interest in it.

The Evans Gambit is basically an aggressive variant of the Giuoco Piano, which normally continues with the positional moves 4. c3 or 4. d3. The idea behind the move 4. b4 is to give up a pawn in order to secure a strong centre and bear down on Black's weak-point, f7. Ideas based on Ba3, preventing black from castling, are also often in the air. The most obvious and most usual way for Black to meet the gambit is to accept it with 4... Bxb4, after which White plays 5. c3 and Black usually follows up with 5... Ba5 (5... Be7 and, less often 5... Bc5 and 5... Bd6 are also played). White usually follows up with 6. d4.

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Niklas Hallqvist    (1438)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4

The Winawer! A variation of the French Defence that has a tendency to get a bit wild, often with white's king stuck in the middle and a fierce attack from white on black's kingside. Black tries to counterattack on the queenside.
============

Contributors : Toncho Tenev, Niklas Hallqvist


Telmo Escobar    (2043)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Ng4 Bb5

Wins material (JC).

I think it's convenient to examine the possible continuation of the game in order to exclude the possibility that Black could get a reasonable compensation for the material, as many Dragon players are sooo happy when losing an exchange :) (TE)
============

Contributors : Julien Coll, Telmo Escobar


Julien Coll    (1400)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 f3

Here begins the Yugoslav Attack, a very rich way of fighting against the big dragon. Usually White castles queenside and launches a strong attack by pushing his g (g4) and h-pawns (h4-h5) and exchanging the dark-squared bishops (Qd2-Bh6), whereas Black has counterplay with an attack against White's long castle thanks to the c-file, manoeuvres like ...Nc6-e5-c4, pawn pushes like ...b5-b4, ...a5-a4. This kind of game is rarely annoying and very often plenty of sacrifices (ex. sacrifices of the quality in c3 (for Black) and in h5 (for White) are both typical) White should be careful with the g4-square if he plans to castle queenside quickly for an exciting game. Move order is quite important here.

============

Contributors : Julien Coll


Julien Coll    (1400)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 Qd2 Ng4

Black threatens to exchange the dark-squared white bishop, and to leave White with tactical weaknesses in the dark squares (ex. b2, d4, a7-g1, etc.). he has a comfortable game.

============

Contributors : Julien Coll


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3

King's Knight Gambit. The main variation of King's gambit, played in 2 games out of 3. The knight prevents the black queen from checking in h4, although many King's gambit variants are interesting for white with the king at the center, probably making King's gambit the most illogical and critical opening.

Black still can prevent white from castling by playing the Cunningham defense 3. ... Be7

According to Chessbase, white chances are about 49%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 d5

The Abbazia Defense has much the same idea as the Falkbeer Counter-Gambit, and can in fact be reached by transposition from it, e.g. 2.f4 d5 3.exd5 exf4. Black's forward pawn is less well placed on f4 than on e4, but material is even.

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 Be7

The Cunningham Defense is black's most aggressive option; it can permanently prevent white from castling after 4.Bc4 Bh4+ 5.Kf1 (else the wild Bertin Gambit, or Three Pawns' Gambit 5.g3 fxg3 6.0-0 gxh2+ 7.Kh1.) However, nowadays it is more common for black to simply play 4. ..Nf6 5.e5 Ng4, the Modern Cunningham.

The first "best game" (Game 156 : Hrubaru [1400] - Berthelot [1420]) voted by FICGS players, followed this opening, not played anymore at a master level.

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


David Grosdemange    (1912)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5

this is the most played move on this position . black don't protect his e5 pawn , so white take it .

============

Contributors : David Grosdemange


Julien Coll    (1400)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5 d6 Nxf7

The Cochrane Gambit, an old rare and very crude way of fighting against the Petrov, based on the establishment of a firm grip on the center and the long-term exploitment of Black's slightly exposed King.
============

Contributors : Julien Coll


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
e4 c5 d4 cxd4 c3

The Morra Gambit is an interesting opening against the Sicilian Defence. It is not common in Grandmaster games or correspondence chess, but at club level chess it is an excellent weapon.

White sacrifices a pawn to develop quickly and create attacking chances. In exchange for the gambit pawn, White has a piece developed and a pawn in the center, while Black has nothing but an empty space on c7.

If black wants to refuse the gambit, he can do so with 3... d5 or 3... Nf6, both of which transpose to the Alapin variation of the Sicilian (usually introduced by the move order 1.e4 c5 2.c3). Alternatively, 3... d6 is the Smith-Morra declined proper, and leads to unique lines.

Some interesting games played on FICGS by David Angeli : Game 563, Game 565 (accepted gambit) or Game 555 (declined, with 3. ... d5).

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


David Grosdemange    (1912)
e4 Nf6 e5

this is the main variation . white gain space and threatens the black knight .
white chances are about 57% .

============

Contributors : David Grosdemange


David Grosdemange    (1912)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5

here begins the benoni defense . c5 can also be played at first .
black attacks the white d4-pawn , and "force" d5 , then this pawn is the black's target ( with Cf6 , e6 for example ) .

============

Contributors : David Grosdemange


David Grosdemange    (1912)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 b5

the benko gambit . when accepted , black have counterplay in the a and b columns , and by the control of the a1-h8 and f1-a6 diagonals .

============

Contributors : David Grosdemange


Larry Wolfley    (2133)
e4 c5 d4 cxd4 Nf3

This is an attempt to trick Black into playing 3..e5 (4.Nxe5 Qa5+ -+), White responds with 4.c3 and after 4..dxc3 will have reached a good variation of the Morra gambit.

An interesting try for Black is 3..a6, and if White plays 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5! reaches a variation of the O'kelly Sicilian that is considered not bad for Black, and he has avoided White's most promising lines.

1.e4 c5 2.Nf6 a6 (O'kelly) and now both 3.c3 and 3.c4 are generally considered more testing against this line.


============

Contributors : Larry Wolfley


Larry Wolfley    (2133)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 c3

White plays as in the c3 (Alapin) Sicilian (1.e4 c5 2.c3) and will try to show that Black's a6 move is not that usefull.

============

Contributors : Larry Wolfley


Pablo Schmid    (1700)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6

This move is generally played to reach the Sicilian Taimanov or the Sicilian Kan(Paulsen).
The advantage of e6 is to keep options open for the bishop of the dark squares. But it as somes disadvantages too: The sicilian with c3 or b3 is stronger here compared to 2..d6 or 2..Nc6 because e6 limits Black's options.
============

Contributors : Pablo Schmid


Pablo Schmid    (1700)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 c3

With the idea to play a Smith-Morra gambit where Black's options of declining the gambit are a little less good compared to the immediate 2.d4

============

Contributors : Pablo Schmid


David Grosdemange    (1912)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 c3

this anti-sicilian is better against this black move ...e6 .

============

Contributors : David Grosdemange


David Grosdemange    (1912)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 g6

this move enters the accelerated dragon variation .
black will put his king's bishop in fianchetto , and prepare d5 .

============

Contributors : David Grosdemange


David Grosdemange    (1912)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 g6 c4 Nf6

the normal move .
black attacks the white e4 pawn .

============

Contributors : David Grosdemange


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5

The Grünfeld Defence is named after Ernst Grünfeld, the player who first employed the defence in the 1920s. The defence was later adopted by a number of prominent players, including Vasily Smyslov, Viktor Korchnoi and Bobby Fischer. Garry Kasparov has often used the defence, including in his World Championship matches against Anatoly Karpov in 1986, 1987 and 1990, and Vladimir Kramnik in 2000. In more recent years it has been regularly employed by Loek Van Wely, Peter Svidler and Luke McShane among others.

The opening relies on one of the main principles of the hypermodern school, which was coming to the fore in the 1920s - that a large pawn centre could be a liability rather than an asset. This idea is seen most clearly in the Exchange Variation of the defence: 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.e4. Now White has an imposing looking centre - and the main continuation 5...Nxc3 bxc3 strengthens it still further. Black generally attack's White's centre with ...c5 and ...Bg7, often followed by moves like ...cxd4, ...Bg4, and ...Nc6. White often uses his big centre to launch an attack against Black's king, which generally ends up on g8 after Black castles king-side.

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7

The King's Indian defense is a "hypermodern" opening, where Black lets White take the center with the view to later ruining White's "wonderful" position, often by an attack on White's king. It is a risky opening, which has been a favourite of players such as former world champions Garry Kasparov, Bobby Fischer and Tigran Petrosian. Prominent grandmasters John Nunn, Svetozar Gligoric, Wolfgang Uhlmann, and Larry Christiansen have also played this opening frequently.

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7 e4 d6

The King's Indian Defense.

According to Chessbase, black chances are about 40%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7 e4 d6 f4

The four pawns attack is a sharp line in which White tries to overrun Black with his center pawns. Such a strategy entails considerable risk, and analysis constantly shifts back and forth as to its validity. The pawn on f4 prevents Black's usual e5 break, but Black can get counterplay with a c5 break instead. The main line four pawns position can also be reached from a Sicilian move order.

According to Chessbase, white chances are about 61% , but correspondence chess statistics give no more than 51%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
e4 c5 b4

Wing Gambit is the name given to the branches of several openings in which one player gambits a wing pawn, usually the b pawn).

Most common is the Wing Gambit in the Sicilian Defence. After Black takes with 2...cxb4, the usual continuation is 3.a3 bxa3 (3...d5 is also possible). It is also possible to decline (or at least delay acceptance of) the gambit with 2...d5.

For his pawn, White gets quicker development and a central advantage, but it is not generally considered one of White's better choices against the Sicilian, and is virtually never seen at the professional level (amongst amateurs it is more common, though still not so popular as other systems).

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
d4 Nf6 Bg5

The Trompowski attack is named after the one-time Brazilian champion Octavio Siqueiro F. Trompowski (1897–1984) who played it in the 1930s and 1940s.

With the second move, White is intending to exchange his bishop for Black's knight inflicting doubled pawns upon Black in the process. This is not a lethal threat, Black can choose to fall in with White's plan.

After 1.d4 Nf6, the Trompowski is a popular alternative to the more common 2.c4 and 2.Nf3 lines. By playing 2.Bg5, White avoids the immense opening theory of various Indian Defences like the Queen's Indian and the King's Indian. Some of the grandmasters who often play the Trompowski are Julian Hodgson and Antoaneta Stefanova.

According to Chessbase, white chances are about 56%

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Yeturu Aahlad    (2017)
c4 e5

Normal move which fights for the center. In practice this is a reversed Sicilian. Black eyes d4-square and takes on the kingside. White plans queenside attack while black has play on the kingside.

============

Contributors : Larry Wolfley, Kostis Megalios, Lauri Lahnasalo, Yeturu Aahlad


David Grosdemange    (1912)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 b5 a4 b4

black gain space on the queen side . the Nb1 has lost his best square ...

============

Contributors : David Grosdemange


David Grosdemange    (1912)
f4 e5 g4

this mistake allows black to play the quickest mate possible .

============

Contributors : David Grosdemange


Larry Wolfley    (2133)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 c4 e6

Now, when White plays d4, Black will often respond with cxd4 Nxd4 followed by Bb4, with some pressure on the e4 pawn, and the potential positional threat of Bxc3.

============

Contributors : Larry Wolfley


Pablo Schmid    (1700)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5

The best reply. White gains a tempo by threatening Nd6+. Other moves shouldn't give a problem to Black.

============

Contributors : Pablo Schmid


David Grosdemange    (1912)
c4 c5

the symmetrical english .
if blacks plays too long symmetrical , white can keep a little advantage with the advance to play first . but black can isn't forced to continue playing symmetrical .

this move is sometimes used by sicilian players , because it can transpose into a maroczy bind .

============

Contributors : David Grosdemange


David Grosdemange    (1912)
e4 e6 d4 d5 e5 c5

black attack the d4 pawn .

============

Contributors : David Grosdemange


David Grosdemange    (1912)
e4 c5 Nf3 g6 d4 cxd4 Qxd4

this move is possible because black hasn't played Nc6 . so the queen attacks the h8 rook .

============

Contributors : David Grosdemange


Pablo Schmid    (1700)
e4 Nf6 e5 Nd5 d4 d6 Nf3 Bg4

This is the old main line. Black is still pressuring the center in a logical way.

============

Contributors : Pablo Schmid


Pablo Schmid    (1700)
e4 Nf6 Nc3 d5 e5

The only testing move. Now Black have three choices: 3..d4!?, 3..Ne4 or 3..Nd7.

============

Contributors : Pablo Schmid


Thibault de Vassal    (2425)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6

The main move. Black doesn't fear the "loss" of the e5 pawn : 3.Bxc6 dxc6! 4.Nxe5?! because of ..Qd4! with equallity at worst.

Morphy Defence, by far the most commonly played Black third move which "puts the question" to the white bishop. White has only two good options, 4.Bxc6 or 4.Ba4. The main point to 3...a6 is that after the common retreat 4.Ba4, Black will have the possibility of breaking the pin on his queen knight by playing ...b5. In fact, White must take some care to not fall into the Noah's Ark Trap in which Black traps White's king bishop on the b3-square with a ...a6, ...b5, and ...c4 pawn advance on the queenside.

============

Contributors : Pablo Schmid, Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Bg5

Richter-Rauzer opening, caracterized by last move 6.Bg5, was introduced by the German Master, Kurt Richter. The idea was to force an immediate 6....e6 or risk doubled king-pawns. At this point, Vsevolod Rauzer contributed the move, 7.Qd2. Here, White has an advantage in space and development is nearly complete while Black has a better pawn structure.

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Larry Wolfley    (2133)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 b5 cxb5 a6 b6

White declines the gambit pawn. One strategy for White against routine development by Black (i.e. d6/g6/Bg7); is to maneuver the King knight to c4, bishop to f4 and prepare e5.

============

Contributors : Larry Wolfley


David Grosdemange    (1912)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 b5 cxb5 a6 b6 e6

black counter-attacks on the white central pawn .

============

Contributors : David Grosdemange


Terry Godat    (2036)
e4 e5 f4 Bc5

another way to decline the king's gambit .

============

Contributors : David Grosdemange, Terry Godat

If Black wants to decline the gambit and still play for a win, this seems to be the best way.




Graham Cridland    (1692)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nc6 Nc3 Qc7

Black has two main choices here, the text move and ...a6. In either case, White can either ignore the move order and proceed with development (the main lines), or attempt to take advantage of the difference. In the case of ...Qc7, this generally means Ponomariov's pet line 6 Ndb5 Qb8 7 Be3!?, using the b5 square before it is covered to inconvenience Black in his development.

Otherwise, we enter the major Paulsen/Taimanov variations (and Black will generally play ...a6 to rule out Ndb5 ideas).
============

Contributors : Graham Cridland


Graham Cridland    (1692)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nc6 Nc3 a6

Black's secondary option (after ...Qc7, probably the main line) is this move. White also has an independent option here (6 Nxc6), and can also choose the main lines.

============

Contributors : Graham Cridland


Graham Cridland    (1692)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nc6 Nc3 Qc7 Ndb5

The old, unimposing line was now a2-a4, trying to restrict Black's chances. The line associated with Ponomariov begins with 7 Be3

============

Contributors : Graham Cridland


Graham Cridland    (1692)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nc6 Nc3 Qc7 Ndb5 Qb8 Be3

Other moves allow black to play ...a6 without fear, and the position is likely to transpose back to the main lines.

============

Contributors : Graham Cridland


Graham Cridland    (1692)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nc6 Nc3 Qc7 Ndb5 Qb8 Be3 a6

Black goes in for the forcing lines. Now there are few acceptable alternatives to the Queen sacrifice.

============

Contributors : Graham Cridland


Thibault de Vassal    (2425)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6

The Berlin Defence is logical and solid, although it can be hard for Black to generate winning chances. Arthur Bisguier played this line for decades, and it was later taken up by Alexei Shirov and other young grandmasters. Vladimir Kramnik used the Berlin Defence as a drawing variation against Garry Kasparov in their 2000 World Championship match.

After 4.0-0, Black can play either the solid 4...Nxe4 or the more combative 4...Bc5. After 4...Nxe4 5.d4 (5.Re1 Nd6 6.Nxe5 is also reasonable) Nd6 6.Bxc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 Nf5 8.Qxd8+ (8.Qe2?! Nd4! 9.Nxd4 Qxd4 favors Black. After 10.Rd1, Bg4!? 11.Rxd4 Bxe2 gives Black a pleasant endgame.) Kxd8 White is usually considered to have a small advantage in light of his somewhat better pawn structure and Black's awkwardly placed king, but Black, with a solid position and the bishop pair, has excellent drawing chances.

============

Contributors : Julien Baudement, Tim Bredernitz, Thibault de Vassal


Rémi Marois    (1500)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5

This variation is known as the anti-Najdorf system because black can no longer play 6 ... e5.

============

Contributors : Rémi Marois


Rémi Marois    (1500)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2

The most popular move. The object is to challenge black's idea to take the b2 pawn.

============

Contributors : Rémi Marois


Premraj Natarajan    (1800)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Qxb2

When black captures b2 pawn with the queen its called the poisoned pawn and hence white is supposed to win because of this early sacrifice.
This stage its still I believe is unclear.

============

Contributors : Rémi Marois, Premraj Natarajan


Graham Cridland    (1438)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 b5

The Polugaevsky Variation, permitting, and indeed virtually requiring White to continue with e4-e5. Any alternative permits Black ...Bb7 with active development.
============

Contributors : Rémi Marois, Graham Cridland


Rémi Marois    (1500)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bc4 e6 Bb3

The object of this move is to reduce black's choices and to eliminate the idea of Nxe4 Nxe4 d5.

============

Contributors : Rémi Marois


Andrew Stephenson    (2000)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bc4 e6 Bb3 Nbd7

At one time thought to be unplayable for black was the main choice of Kasparov when facing Bc4
============

Contributors : Rémi Marois, Andrew Stephenson


Larry Wolfley    (2133)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 f3

This often just transposes to the English Attack (6.Be3 and then 7.f3 is more common). With this move order White avoids lines that arise from 6.Be3 Ng4.

On the other hand, White allows Black an additional option of 7..Qb6 here.

============

Contributors : Rémi Marois, Larry Wolfley


Tim Bredernitz    (1100)
e4 e5 Qh5

This is called the Parham Attack. It's used commonly in lower scholastic tournaments. If used against a player who has the ability to see multiple moves ahead, however, the early over-development of the Queen will result in either the loss of the white Queen, or the loss of a tempo. The move is deceiving, because white is actually putting the e5 pawn under attack. If black counters by attacking the queen with 2. ... g6?, they lose a rook a rook to 3.Qxe5+. The most effective way to counter against this attack is to protect the e5 pawn. After the King pawn is protected, white's queen is left overdeveloped and subject to attack. Overall, the Parham Attack is only effective against beginning chess players.


============

Contributors : Tim Bredernitz


Pablo Schmid    (1700)
e4 e5 Qh5 Nf6

With this move, Black ignores the threat of Qxe5+ to gain somes tempo.
============

Contributors : Pablo Schmid


Roger Whitman    (1971)
e4 e5 Qh5 Nf6 Qxe5 Be7

Black continues to developp himself and will gain another tempo with Nc6.

============

Contributors : Pablo Schmid, Roger Whitman


Tim Bredernitz    (1100)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 d6

A great way to combat the Ruy Lopez. It takes the punch out of it, because it protects the king pawn. There would now be no advantage to trading the bishop for the black knight, because the e pawn is still protected.

============

Contributors : Tim Bredernitz


Adrian Tan    (1700)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Bxc6

The Ruy Lopez exchange, White gives up the advantage of the bishop pair, but gains compensation by damaging black's pawn structure.

White has a long range plan of creating an endgame where he is able to profit from a king side majority while Black is unable to due to the doubled pawn on the Queen's side.

Traditionally, this opening has not being very popular at the top level, but Fischer had some success with it in the 60s.

Note: White doesn't actually win the e pawn with this move because dxc6 Nxe5 Qd4 recovers the pawn.

============

Contributors : Tim Bredernitz, Adrian Tan


David Grosdemange    (1912)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 dxc6

There is a question as to which pawn you should take the bishop with. Let me clear this up. White will now take the e pawn.


* white won't take the e-pawn (because of Qd4!-/+) , but white has a majority on the king-site (4 against 3) , when black's majority on queen-side isn't really effective , because of the doubled pawns .


============

Contributors : Tim Bredernitz, David Grosdemange


David Grosdemange    (1912)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 dxc6 Nxe5

It now looks like white has succeeded in trading a bishop for a knight and a pawn, along with control of the center. There is, however, a great equalizer for this attack. Qd4.

* taking the e-pawn is a good black move . white will lose the pawn , and there no more compensation for the pair of bishops .

============

Contributors : Tim Bredernitz, David Grosdemange


Adrian Tan    (1700)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 dxc6 Nxe5 Qd4

White is now forced to return the pawn.

After Nf3 Qxe4+ Qe2 Qxe2+ Kxe2, White has no compensation for the bishop pair. Black is at least equal or better.

There are more promising lines for White.

============

Contributors : Tim Bredernitz, Adrian Tan


Normajean Yates    (1858)
f4 e6 g4 Qh4

The fastest possible checkmate in chess.

Logically, but not idiomatically, *one* of the fastest checkmates in chess; because this is only *one* of the four mates on black's second move:

1. f(3/4) e(6/5) 2.g4 Qh4#, and the same with white's two moves transposed i.e. 1.g4 e(6/5) 2.f(3/4) Qh4#; making for 8 shortest mates :)

============

Contributors : Tim Bredernitz, Normajean Yates


Tim Bredernitz    (1100)
e4 e5 Qh5 g6 Qxe5

Black has now lost a rook, along with whatever else white manages to pick off in the corner.

============

Contributors : Tim Bredernitz


Sandor Porkolab    (2269)
e4 d5

One of the oldest recorded openings, first recorded as being played between Francesco di Castellvi and Narciso Vinyoles in Valencia in 1475, and being mentioned by Lucena in 1497. It and the French Defense are the oldest asymmetric defenses to 1.e4.

It is a playable, underrated defence that can lead to equality for black. White almost always takes the pawn. Other alternatives are 2. Nc3!?, leading to the Dunst opening, 2. d4!?, leading to the Blackmar-Deimer gambit, and 2. e5?!, leading to unique positions where black can easily equalise. After 2. exd5, there are two very different ways of playing the defence, 2...Nf6 and 2...Qxd5.

1.e4 d5 2.e5!? is also an option - going to French/CaroCann Lines - preventing the skandinawian...
============

Contributors : Adam Domurad, Sandor Porkolab


Max Rau-Chaplin    (1600)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6

The idea behind Nf6 is that black can take back the pawn the next turn with the knight and not lose tempo by having his queen attacked. If white tries to hold onto the pawn with 3. c4, black has 3...c6! offering a pawn for a significant lead in development (Panov-Botvinnik atack). Best for white is to decline the pawn and transpose to the Caro-Kann defence with 4.d4.

============

Contributors : Adam Domurad, Max Rau-Chaplin


Adam Domurad    (1700)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5

Temporarily, it seems as if black has a lead in development, and an open file for his queen. But white has Nc3 where the queen most move again while white has developed a piece.

============

Contributors : Adam Domurad


Amir Bagheri    (2513)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5

White plays an early Bb5, usually with the intention of trading it for the c6-knight and giving Black doubled pawns. Blacks most usual continuation is to quickly developed by 3...g6, although moves like 3...Qc7, 3...Qb6 and 3...e6 are also possible.


============

Contributors : Amir Bagheri


Richard Hendricks    (1459)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6 g3 Bb7

Black develops his "Indian" Queen's Bishop into place on b7, dominates the light-squared centre and will now seek to occupy e4.


============

Contributors : Richard Hendricks


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
e4 d6

The Pirc Defence, sometimes known as the Ufimtsev Defence.

Amir agheri : When it comes to chess openings, I prefer to play less popular, less traveled lines. For almost two decades, I have mostly played the Queen pawn Opening, the Dutch Defense, and the French Defense, which are all well known, solid openings sane opening choices. However, I must confess I have a passion for opening study and experimenting. Recently I have been experimenting with the Balogh Counter Gambit against 1.e4.

Did he say the Balogh Counter Gambit?? What is that?

Well, play starts out like a Pirc Defense, 1.e4 d6 2.d4 and now instead of 2…Nf6, Black plays the shocking 2…f5!?

============

Contributors : Amir Bagheri, Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
d4 f5

The dutch defense.

Black's ...f5 stakes a serious claim to the e4 square and looks towards an attack on White's kingside in the middlegame. However, it weakens Black's own kingside somewhat, and does nothing to contribute to Black's development. As of 2005, the defence is unpopular in top-level play. The Dutch has never been one of the main lines against 1.d4, though in the past a number of top players, including Alexander Alekhine, Bent Larsen and Paul Morphy, have used it with success. Perhaps its high-water mark occurred in 1951, when both world champion Mikhail Botvinnik and his challenger, David Bronstein, played it in their championship match.

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Mike Hoogland    (1760)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 dxc6 d4

An old move, played before Fischer's 0-0. After the pawn exchange, White creates a favourable endgame pawn structure, given his 4-3 pawn majority on the Kingside. Black is unable to exploit his Queenside majority because of the doubled pawn. However in practise, Black is able to to create sufficient counterplay with his bishop pair to hold the balance.

============

Actually, I think this is a bad move. After 0-0 black will have to defend the pawn on e5. 6. Nxe5, Qd4. 7. Nf3, Qxe4 does not work anymore for black, because white can play his rook to e1 and win the queen (the queen is pinned).

Therefore, black usually defends the pawn with f6. f6 is not very useful however, and black would rather have made another move, if he could have done so. Qd6 and Qf6 are also good moves that defend the pawn on e5. However, after 6. d4, exd4 7. Qxd4, Qxd4 black will have lost a tempo in comparison to this variant.

Contributors : Adrian Tan, Mike Hoogland


Adrian Tan    (1700)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Bc5 c3 Nf6

A logical response, black strikes back at the center, now that the natural Nc3 isn't available to defend the e pawn.

============

Contributors : Adrian Tan


Alex Savu    (1350)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 Ng5 d5 exd5 Nxd5 Nxf7

The "Fried Liver" or "Fegatello" attack. By sacrificing his knight on f7, white causes the knight on d5 to become pinned. The next few moves revolve around exploiting this pin (for white) or defending the material advantage (for black). - Alex Savu
============

Contributors : Adrian Tan, Alex Savu


Pablo Schmid    (1700)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 a6

This is the Sicilian Kan (or sometimes called Paulsen.

Black plays a6 to allow Qc7 (by preventing a White Nb5) and enable ...b5.

============

Contributors : Richard Hendricks, Pablo Schmid


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 a6 Nc3 Qc7

According to Chessbase, black chances are about 41%

============

Contributors : Richard Hendricks, Thibault de Vassal


Richard Hendricks    (1459)
e4 c5 Nc3 e6

Black pushes his King's Pawn out to e6, planning 3...d5.

============

Contributors : Richard Hendricks


David Grosdemange    (1983)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 Bb5+ Nc6

It is an alternative for Black to prepare a favourable exchange with Bd7, then a6. Then White can retire by playing Bf1 (after Re1) or exchange the bishop, then black bishop have a good square in c6.

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Gregory Kohut    (1783)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5

The beginning of the end ! Black has no moveoptions and the Qf6-Move is a MUST and not a can.

The following comment is by me (Benjamin Aldag):

The Kings Gambit was good to play in the early 80s. But with comming of good and fast computers, the Kings Gambit is researched move for move in all lines. If both players play the best moves, all white can reach is a draw. But the point is, white has the chance, to do more wrong in the opening, than black. Ok, there are some kiddy-tricks by white, but if black want an equal game, he will get it. Now letz take a look to the latvian,- the Kings Gambit with a tempo down. If the Kings Gambit is bad, why should the Latvian Gambit good for black with a tempo down ? The only way for black is to hope, that the white player isn't prepared for this gambit. There are many traps, but the basics of these traps are easy to see. Black is from beginning on under big pressure and has no dynamic play. In nearly all lines of the Latvian Gambit, black has only forced moves. From now on, i will give to all moves in all lines my commentary. Ok.... i'am not a GM, IM, or FM, but i think i know the Latvian Gambit really good.
============

Contributors : Benjamin Aldag, Gregory Kohut


Benjamin Aldag    (1822)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Qf6 Nc4

Nc4:

This move in good too. The better move is d2-d4, but you must know a hand full lines in the d4-line, to crush the blacks position while sleeping ;-) For beginners its better to play Nc4, because you will get an easy and advantage game.

============

Contributors : Benjamin Aldag


Sophie Leclerc    (1200)
e4 e5 Nf3 f6

This poor looking defense is know as damiano defense. It is far from being refuted, if played correctly, hoverer, this defense is very sharp and lack attacking chance, black doesn't have very good compensation for a pawn.
If played to perfection, it is know as draw, but player avoids it as it is very sharp, one mistake for black and it is over.
2 F6 as many disvatage, is open the a2-68 diagonal, it breaks black short castle. It takes ways the f6 square for the knight and the queen. It also open the very dengerous h5-e8 diagonal, all this to protect a pawn, this is a very dangerous opening. It should called Damiano Gambit. Should be a draw, even if your opponent take the e5 pawn, as 2... f6 isn't an instant protection.
============

Contributors : Benjamin Aldag, Sophie Leclerc


Sophie Leclerc    (1242)
e4 f5 exf5 Nf6 g4


A coorect move, Likein the king gambit, White make it difficult for black to regain the pawn and treath to push g5.

Blakc must do something about it very soon.
============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Thibault de Vassal    (2424)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 c3

The Göring Gambit is a relative of the Danish Gambit that starts with 4.c3. Now transposing into the Danish with 4...d5 equalizes for Black, but he can also accept the pawn with 4...dxc3. White can then transpose into the Danish by offering a second pawn with 5.Bc4. If Black accepts the second pawn with 5...cxb2 6.Bxb2 d6, he can defend successfully after either 7.Qb3 Qd7 or 7.0-0 Be6 8.Bxe6 fxe6 9.Qb3 Qd7. To remain in the Göring proper, White recaptures with his knight with 5.Nxc3 and Black can defend with 5...Bb4 6.Bc4 d6.

============

Contributors : Benjamin Aldag, Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2407)
e4 Nc6

The Nimzowitsch or Fischer Defense.

This is a somewhat unusual chess opening and an example of hypermodern chess where Black invites White to occupy the centre of the board at an early stage with pawns. Black's intent is to block or otherwise restrain White's central pawns and, if allowed to do so by inaccurate play by White, eventually undermine the White pawn center by well-timed pawn advances of his own or by attacking the White pieces defending the centre.

============

Contributors : Dirk Jan Van Dijl, Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2424)
e4 Nc6 Nf3

Now if Black plays e5, the game transpose in main open game variations.

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Adam Goodwin    (1225)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1

Protects the e4-pawn and forces black's next move.
============

Contributors : Dirk Jan Van Dijl, Adam Goodwin


Bruno Bragato    (1500)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2

The Tarrasch Variation is named after Siegbert Tarrasch. This move was particularly popular during the late 1970s and early 1980s when Anatoly Karpov used it to great effect. It is still played today by players seeking a small, safe advantage.

The move differs from 3.Nc3 in several respects: it doesn't block the path of White's c pawn, which means he can play c3 at some stage to support the d4 pawn; and it avoids the Winawer Variation because 3...Bb4 can be met with 4.c3 when Black has wasted a move (he has to retreat his bishop).
============

Contributors : Dirk Jan Van Dijl, Bruno Bragato


Peter Marriott    (1816)
g4

Grob's Attack named after Swiss IM Henri Grob (1904-74).

White intends to put pressure along the h1-a8 diagonal while also threatening to launch a Kingside pawn storm.

The opening is considered inferior for White (-0.32 at this stage of analysis 29/06/2008), but it avoids endless theoretical discussions and cannot be avoided by Black. The positions are often highly tactical and natural play by Black may lead him into several traps.

Evaluation notes from Kjetil Prestesaeter:
I have added all known named lines plus other lines favored by Rybka (Rybka 2.3 mp 32-bit, 17ply). Many of the named lines seem to be more romantic than strong. Please extend the analysis if you have spare time and computer power.

Notes by Peter Marriott:

I used to use the Grob in many blitz games I have played against humans. I actually had good success, not because it is a good move, but because it confused many players. On a chess server, I actually achieved a rating from 16-1700 by playing it. Many, many players simply responded by ...d5 and after I played Bg2, they took the g4 pawn, which led me to win a whole bunch of games by playing 3.c4, with an eye on b7. Maybe the right way to play this for black is simply to play 1.g4 d5 2.Bg2 then c6. Then white wonders what he's gonna do (At least I did!)
============

Contributors : Benjamin Aldag, Gary Gruwé, Kjetil Prestesaeter, Peter Marriott


Thibault de Vassal    (2424)
e4 c5 f4 d5 Nf3 dxe4 Ng5 Nf6 Bc4 Bg4

Until White plays Be2 (which is not very coherent), Black takes the queen and leaves a bishop, a knight and an awful structure. A very interesting unsymmetrical position to come. However I think it's equal.

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2424)
e4 c5 f4 d5 Nf3 dxe4 Ng5 Nf6 Bc4 Bg4 Bxf7+ Kd7 Qxg4+ Nxg4 Be6+

Now Black has three choices : Kc6, Kc7 .. and Ke8 which leads to an immediate draw by repetition.

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2424)
e4 c5 f4 d5 Nf3 dxe4 Ng5 Nf6 Bc4 Bg4 Bxf7+ Kd7 Qxg4+ Nxg4 Be6+ Kc6 Bxg4

Here Black has choice, but no mistake to do. This is typically a position where chess engines are lost. In my opinion 9. ...g6 is quite reasonable to find a balance in pieces activity.

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Pablo Schmid    (1736)
e4 c5 f4 d5 exd5 Nf6

It's better to try regaining the pawn with the knight. White can try to hold the pawn with c4 or Bb5+ followed by c4, but Black should not fear that.

============

Contributors : Pablo Schmid


Florian Cafiero    (1600)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 b5

Pressures the White bishop, while allowing the Black bishop to enter the game. Allows only one answer for the Whites.


============

Contributors : Dirk Jan Van Dijl, Florian Cafiero


Thibault de Vassal    (2424)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Bc4

The Scotch Gambit.

Instead of 4.Nxd4, White has two ways to offer a gambit. The Scotch Gambit starts with 4.Bc4

Black can transpose into the Two Knights Defense with 4...Nf6 or he can continue the Scotch with 4...Bc5 5.c3 and now 5...Nf6 will transpose into a safe variation of the Giuoco Piano. Black can instead accept the gambit with 5...dxc3 but this is riskier because White will gain a lead in development. A possible continuation is 6.Nxc3 (Grandmaster Sveshnikov has played 6.Bxf7+!? Kxf7 7.Qd5+ followed by 8.Qxc5) 6...d6 7.Qb3 Qd7 8.Nd5 Nge7 9.Qc3 0-0.

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Mark Carroll    (1700)
e4 c5 d4 cxd4 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 Nc6

The most common approach for black.

============

Contributors : Mark Carroll


Mark Carroll    (1700)
e4 c5 d4 cxd4 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 Nc6 Nf3


This move order does not allow black to try and complicate things with moves such as Ne5.
============

Contributors : Mark Carroll


Mark Carroll    (1700)
e4 c5 d4 cxd4 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 Nc6 Nf3 d6 Bc4 Nf6

This is an easy opening trap for black to fall into.

============

Contributors : Mark Carroll


Mark Carroll    (1700)
e4 c5 d4 cxd4 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 Nc6 Nf3 d6 Bc4 Nf6 e5 Nxe5

This is not the best choice for black. At best, he will now go down a piece.

============

Contributors : Mark Carroll


Mark Carroll    (1700)
e4 c5 d4 cxd4 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 Nc6 Nf3 d6 Bc4 Nf6 e5 Nxe5 Nxe5

If PxN then white follows with Bxf7 winning the queen (after Kxf7, QXQ and black cannot take it back).
============

Contributors : Mark Carroll


Charlie Neil    (1403)
d4 Nf6 c4 Nc6

Anyone? Black Knight's tango

============

Contributors : Charlie Neil


Thibault de Vassal    (2424)
d4 Nf6 c4 Nc6 Nf3

Black wants to play hypermodern style and destruct White's pawns center later. White develops quietly.

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Dragan Florin    (1800)
g3 d5

Black plays for control of the center.

============

Contributors : Mark Carroll, Dragan Florin


Mark Carroll    (1700)
g3 d5 Nf3 Nf6 Bg2 e6 O-O Be7 d3 c5 Nbd2 Nc6 e4 b6

Black begins play on the queenside and allows his Biship to be developed attacking the center.

============

Contributors : Mark Carroll


Mark Carroll    (1700)
g3 d5 Nf3 Nf6 Bg2 e6 O-O Be7 d3 c5 Nbd2 Nc6 e4 b6 e5 Nd7 Re1 Qc7 Qe2 Bb7 h4 O-O-O a3 h6 h5

This move stops black from being able to play g5, which would begin a good attack for him.

============

Contributors : Mark Carroll


Mark Carroll    (1700)
g3 d5 Nf3 Nf6 Bg2 e6 O-O Be7 d3 c5 Nbd2 Nc6 e4 b6 e5 Nd7 Re1 Qc7 Qe2 Bb7 h4 O-O-O a3 h6 h5 Rdg8 c4 d4 b4

White offers black a pawn in order to speed up the attack.

============

Contributors : Mark Carroll


Mark Carroll    (1700)
g3 d5 Nf3 Nf6 Bg2 e6 O-O Be7 d3 c5 Nbd2 Nc6 e4 b6 e5 Nd7 Re1 Qc7 Qe2 Bb7 h4 O-O-O a3 h6 h5 Rdg8 c4 d4 b4 g6

Black wisely decides not to accept the pawn sacrafice.

============

Contributors : Mark Carroll


Mark Carroll    (1700)
c4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 e4 d5 e5 Ne4 Nf3 Be7 Qc2 Ng5 Nxg5 Bxg5 cxd5 exd5 d4 Be7 Be3 O-O O-O-O Nc6 a3 Na5 Bd3 h6 Qe2

This is not the best move for white. In this position, both sides should attempt a pawn storm and all out attack on the other side's king. For white, f4 would be a better alternative as it gives him an advantage in his attack. Qe2 wastes time and allows black to go ahead with his counterattack.
============

Contributors : Mark Carroll


Marc Lacrosse    (2233)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Bc5

The Basman-Sale sicilian.
If white plays Nb3, Black intends to go for some original play with Bb6, Ne7 and often f5.
If Be3, than Qb6 with pressure along the a7-g1 diagonal. Some lines lead to extremely confuse highly tactical positions.
Originally played by british IM Michael Basman in the seventies and eighties. More recently IM Srdjan Sale has been the main exponent of the variation with some fair results including a win against the then young Peter Leko.

============

Contributors : Marc Lacrosse


Benjamin Aldag    (1822)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Qf6 Nc4 fxe4 Nc3

Qf7:

G. Gunderarms Move. Black follows the gambit-style and white must be prepared in this variantion. But with a good preperation, white is playing for the full point (in my opinion). Black prepares d7-d5.


============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal, Benjamin Aldag


Benjamin Aldag    (1822)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Qf6 Nc4 fxe4 Nc3 Qf7

Qf7:

G. Gunderarms Move. Black follows the gambit-style and white must be prepared in this variantion. But with a good preperation, white is playing for the full point (in my opinion). Black prepares d7-d5.
============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal, Benjamin Aldag


Benjamin Aldag    (1822)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Qf6 Nc4 fxe4 Nc3 Qf7 Ne3 c6

c6:

Black still want to play d7-d5 and the c6 move is preparing it. White has now the choice between Nxe4 and d2-d3. The best move for white is in my opinion d2-d3, known as the Budowskys-Line.

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal, Benjamin Aldag


Benjamin Aldag    (1822)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Qf6 Nc4 fxe4 Nc3 Qf7 Ne3 c6 Nxe4

Nxe4?:

This move is not really bad, but d2-d3 is better. Black has for his pawn-sacrafice a long initiative. And that's why, i prefer d2-d3 instead of Nxe4.
============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal, Benjamin Aldag


Benjamin Aldag    (1822)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Qf6 Nc4 fxe4 Nc3 Qf7 Ne3 c6 Nxe4 d5 Ng5

How can i describe the past moves of this game with one word ? Hmmm....it's GAMING ! White is playing with his opponent like a cat with a mice. Just count the queenmoves of black, and you will understand me. Let us remember some opening rules:

1. Don't move to early the queen.
2. Don't move with the same figure in the opening twice or more times.
3. Don't open the pawnshield of your king (f-pawn etc.).
4. Develope your figures fast and with one move.

Now......we can see,- Black did in the opening all wrong, what a chessplayer can do wrong in the opening. In the Latvian Gambit, White will kill Black with a headshot !

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal, Benjamin Aldag


Benjamin Aldag    (1822)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Qf6 Nc4 fxe4 Nc3 Qf7 Ne3 c6 d3 exd3 Bxd3 d5 O-O

0-0:

After this move, the white position is clear better, than the blacks !

1.White has the better development !
2.White has the open e-file

The only problem of white could be, that he has at the moment no basepoints in the center. But this is, for the moment, no real problem.


============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal, Benjamin Aldag


Benjamin Aldag    (1822)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Qf6 Nc4 fxe4 Nc3 Qf7 Ne3 c6 d3 exd3 Bxd3 d5 O-O Bd6 Re1 Ne7 Nc4 dxc4 Bxc4 Bxh2+ Kxh2 Qxc4 Re4 Qc5 Be3 Qf5 Qd6

After Qd6, black is totally lost. Is this the way, you want to go in the opening with black ? I believe not ! All white figures are activ and not far away, to crush the black king. If you think the position of black is O.K., than chess is not your game and you should change your hobby (maybe its better for you to play checkers or backgammon)

;-)

============

Contributors : Benjamin Aldag


Dirk Ghysens    (2187)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Bb4

The MacCutcheon Variation, which is more aggressive than ...Be7. Its main defect is, that after exchanging the Bb4 (which is practically forced), Black will have weak dark squares.

============

Contributors : Dirk Ghysens


Dirk Ghysens    (2187)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Bb4 e5

The main continuation, and the only one which gives Black opening problems.

============

Contributors : Dirk Ghysens


Dirk Ghysens    (2187)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Bb4 e5 h6 Bd2

Lasker's move; Black is now forced to exchange on c3.

============

Contributors : Dirk Ghysens


Terry Godat    (2155)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 Bb4 e5 h6 Bd2 Nfd7 Qg4



============

Contributors : Terry Godat

This is very unpleasant for Black.


Thibault de Vassal    (2522)
h4 e5

Next move h5 doesn't try to develop the rook even if the black accept it, they will just taske advantage of it. Maybe try a4 (hypermodern) and wait Black's reaction in the center.

============

Contributors : Terry Godat, Yugi Inving, Thibault de Vassal


Tim Hansell    (0932)
h4 e5 Rh3


============

Contributors : Terry Godat

White's first two moves are usually played only by beginners and those who are too drunk to move a center pawn without knocking all the pieces over. Black already has a clear advantage



Thibault de Vassal    (2425)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 g6

The Smyslov Defence is a quiet positional system played occasionally by Vassily Smyslov and Boris Spassky. It became popular in the 1980s when it was shown that 4.c3 a6! gives Black a good game. Later it was found that after 4.d4 exd4 5.Bg5 White has the advantage, and the variation is rarely played today. An interesting gambit line 4.d4 ed4 5.c3 has also been recommended by Alexander Khalifman, although some of the resulting positions are yet to be tested extensively.

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Peter Marriott    (1816)
g4 d5 Bg2

Grob's Gambit

White aims to tear open the centre for an early material advantage on the queenside.

Notes by Peter Marriott:

The main gambit. White threatens to play 3.c4 if black takes the g4 pawn.
============

Contributors : Ron Keyston, Kieran Child, Kjetil Prestesaeter, Peter Marriott


Kjetil Prestesaeter    (1600)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4

Fritz gambit.

If black goes on the defensive, white can get some good play and has many tactical tricks. These can all be easily seen off though, and black can even counter-gambit with a much superior position.

Chessbase considers this 52% win for white

============

Contributors : Ron Keyston, Kieran Child, Kjetil Prestesaeter


Kjetil Prestesaeter    (1600)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 dxc4

Fritz gambit accepted.

A double edged move, but by no means a bad one. Once white takes the rook, black will have good positional options that is at least equality.

============

Contributors : Ron Keyston, Kieran Child, Kjetil Prestesaeter


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4 cxb2 Bxb2 d5 Bxd5 Nf6 Bxf7+ Kxf7 Qxd8 Bb4+ Qd2 Bxd2+ Nxd2

Considered drawish at the top-levels, but interesting at the club level. White has a 4-2 pawn majority on the kingside, while Black has a 3-1 majority on the queenside. Also the two-sides have opposite-colored bishops.

============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4 cxb2 Bxb2 d5 exd5

This is not as good as Bxd5 as it blocks White's light-squared bishop and allows Black to catch up in development rather easily.

============

Contributors : Ron Keyston


Ron Keyston    (1522)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Be3 a6 f3 b5 g4 h6

A solid try by black

============

Contributors : Sebastian Boehme


Dirk Ghysens    (2187)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qe3

White's intention is to castle long, exert pressure along the d-file and to threaten Black's Kingside.

============

Contributors : Dirk Ghysens


Dirk Ghysens    (2187)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Nc6 Qe3 Nf6 Nc3 Bb4 Bd2 O-O O-O-O Re8 Bc4 Na5 Bd3 d5 Qg3 dxe4 Nxe4 Nxe4 Bxe4 Bxd2+ Rxd2 Qe7

Black has a comfortable game (Keres).

============

Contributors : Dirk Ghysens


Kieran Child    (1600)
Nf3 g5

Humphrey gambit. Black looks to quickly gain the initiative through forcing many of white's replies. It's very much unsound though.

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar, Kieran Child


Yra Detchin    (1881)
Nf3 d5 c4

White uses a flank pawn to prevent the development of black's center.

============

Contributors : James Stripes, Yra Detchin [Событие " FICGS__CHESS__RAPID_C__000287 "]
[Сайт "FICGS"]
[Дата "2022.08.14 "]
[Раунд "1"]
[Белые " Дизер,Григорий "]
[Черные " Детчин,Юра "]
[Результат "*"]
[БелыеЭло "1500"]
[ЧерныеЭло "1881"]

1. Кf3 d5 2. c4 d4 3. e3 Кc6 4. Кxd4 Кxd4 5. exd4 Фxd4 6.Сe2 e5 7.OO Ne7 8.*


Ilmars Cirulis    (1200)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 Ng5 Bc5 Nxf7 Bxf2 Kf1 Qe7 Nxh8 d5 exd5 Nd4 c3

Black can force a draw!
============

Contributors : Ilmars Cirulis


Ilmars Cirulis    (1200)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 Ng5 Bc5 Nxf7 Bxf2 Kf1 Qe7 Nxh8 d5 exd5 Nd4 d6 cxd6 c3

After that move black can force draw!
============

Contributors : Ilmars Cirulis


Ilmars Cirulis    (1200)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 Ng5 Bc5 Nxf7 Bxf2 Kf1 Qe7 Nxh8 d5 exd5 Nd4 h3 Bg3 c3 Nf5 Na3 Bd7 Qb3 O-O-O d6

After that move black can again get draw!
============

Contributors : Ilmars Cirulis


Ilmars Cirulis    (1200)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 Ng5 Bc5 Nxf7 Bxf2 Kf1 Qe7 Nxh8 d5 exd5 Nd4 h3 Bg3 c3 Nf5 Na3 Bd7 d6 cxd6 Bb3

Black agains reaches equal position. :G
============

Contributors : Ilmars Cirulis


Ilmars Cirulis    (1200)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 Ng5 Bc5 Nxf7 Bxf2 Kf1 Qe7 Nxh8 d5 exd5 Nd4 h3 Bg3 c3 Nf5 d6 Nxd6 Qf3 Bh4 Na3 Nfe4 Bf7 Nxf7 Qxe4 Nxh8 Qxh7 Qf7 Ke2 Ng6 Rf1 Bf5 Rxf5 Qxf5 Qg8 Nf8 Qxg7

Eh! It's too complicated! And black have chanses to draw. We must look for something simpler.
============

Contributors : Ilmars Cirulis


Thibault de Vassal    (2425)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 Ng5 Bc5 Nxf7 Bxf2 Kxf2 Nxe4 Kg1 Qh4 g3 Nxg3 Nxh8 Nd4

Black force draw !

============

Contributors : Ilmars Cirulis, Thibault de Vassal


Ilmars Cirulis    (1200)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 Ng5 Bc5 Nxf7 Bxf2 Kxf2 Nxe4 Kg1 Qh4 g3 Nxg3 hxg3 Qxg3 Kf1 Rf8

Black force draw!

============

Contributors : Ilmars Cirulis


Ingo Schwarz    (1824)
e4 c5 Bc4 e6 Nc3 Nf6 Qe2 Nc6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nxe4 d5 Bb5 dxe4 Bxc6+ bxc6 Qxe4 Qd5

And Blacks position should be better in view of the bishop pair and the control of the center.

============

Contributors : Ingo Schwarz


Ingo Schwarz    (1824)
e4 c5 Bc4 e6 Nc3 Nf6 Qe2 Nc6 Nf3 Nxe4 Nxe4 d5 Bb5 dxe4 Qxe4 Bd7

Black stands slightly better in view of Bd6, 0-0, f5 and e5.

============

Contributors : Ingo Schwarz


Ingo Schwarz    (1824)
e4 c5 Bc4 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 e5 Ng4 Bxf7+ Kxf7 Ng5+ Kg8 Qxg4 Nxe5 Qe4 d6 Qd5+ e6 Nxe6 Qe7

With counterchances for Black.
============

Contributors : Ingo Schwarz


Kostis Megalios    (1400)
f4 d5

This is the basic position of the Bird, it actually looks like a Dutch reversed, but with a tempo more. Though the dutch is considered to be quite sound the problem of playing it with white is that with black you go for the equality, but with white you have to go for the for advantage.
============

Contributors : Gregory Kohut, Kostis Megalios


Gregory Kohut    (1700)
f4 c5 e4 d6 Nc3

after 2)...d6 , white can obtain a grand prix attack where black lose a tempo , because he's played d6?! .

============

Contributors : David Grosdemange, Alexander Minkin


Gregory Kohut    (1700)
Nc3 Nf6 e4

This is the main alternative to e5, but it is easier to Black to reach equality. They can play 2..e5 transposing into the Vienna game (1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6), or play the sharp 2..d5!? to stay in an independant line.

============

Contributors : Pablo Schmid


Ilmars Cirulis    (1200)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 Ng5 Bc5 Nxf7 Bxf2 Kf1 Qe7 Nxh8 d5 exd5 Nd4 c3 Bg4 Qa4 Kf8 cxd4 exd4 Kxf2 Ne4 Kg1 Qh4 h3 Qf2 Kh2 Qg3 Kg1 Bf3 Bf1 Ng5

0-1 It is won for black!

============

Contributors : Ilmars Cirulis


Ilmars Cirulis    (1200)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 Ng5 Bc5 Nxf7 Bxf2 Kxf2 Nxe4 Ke3 Qh4 g3 Nxg3 hxg3 Qd4 Kf3 O-O Rh4 e4 Rxe4

Mistake. Black get draw.

P.S. Thanks to George Stibal! :)
============

Contributors : Ilmars Cirulis


Torsten Opas    (1541)
e4 c6 Nf3 d5

Zucketort gambit declined - Caro Kann

Essentially the Caro-Kann with the moves jostled around. White will want early castling, or possibly early tactical tricks. Black will be aiming for an influence in the centre of the board.

Chessbase considers this a 56% win for white

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Ivan Gonzalez    (2411)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Bb4 e5 c5 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 Ne7 Qg4 O-O Bd3 Nbc6 Nf3 f5 exf6 Rxf6 Bg5 e5 Qg3 Rxf3 gxf3 c4 Be2 exd4


And black has compensation for the exchange
============

Contributors : Ivan Gonzalez


Telmo Escobar    (2086)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 Nc3 e6 Nh4 Bg6 Nxg6 hxg6 a3 Nbd7 g3 Be7 f4 dxc4 Bxc4 O-O e4 c5 e5 Ne8 d5 exd5 Nxd5 Nb6 Nxe7+ Qxe7 Be2 Nc7


Despite having 2 knights vs 2 bishops, Black has slightly better chances because of his superior development, good coordination of pieces, control of the "d" file, and pawn majority in the queenside.

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Thibault de Vassal    (2425)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nxc6 bxc6 e5 Qe7 Qe2 Nd5 c4 Ba6 b3 O-O-O g3 g5 Bb2 Bg7 Nd2 Nb4 Nf3 Rhe8 Bh3

!? -/=
leads in a small black advantage (s.a. Gonzales - Utesch 2006 corr. FICGS)
============

Contributors : Wolfgang Utesch, Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2425)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nxc6 bxc6 e5 Qe7 Qe2 Nd5 c4 Ba6 b3 O-O-O g3 g5 Bb2 Bg7 Nd2 Nb4 Nf3 Rhe8 Bh3 h5

!? New
leads in a small black advantage (see Gonzales - Utesch 2006 corr. FICGS)
============

Contributors : Wolfgang Utesch, Thibault de Vassal


Carlos da Costa    (1400)
e4 e5 d4 d6

By moving to d6, black is neither doubling his pawns nor having unprotected pawns. Also, black defends his pawn at e5 from attack
============

Contributors : Carlos da Costa


Matthew Edwards    (1700)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 c3

turns a dull sicilian game on its head... if black accepts the gambit, white will develop rapidly whil black has yet to get going.

============

Contributors : Matthew Edwards


Erik Varend    (1400)
c4 g6

According to chessgames.com black's chances are 48%.

============

Contributors : Erik Varend


Kaan Kara    (1588)
d4 d5 c4 e6 cxd5

in order to use central pawn advantage , giving up some mobility for black

============

Contributors : Kaan Kara


Kaan Kara    (1588)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 dxe4 Nxe4 Be7 Bxf6 Bxf6 Nf3

The position gives black to dynamic , mobile position but it also gives white to a central positioned knight which is important
============
Also two bishop is a good thing for black :)

Contributors : Kaan Kara


Wolfgang Utesch    (2461)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Bc5 c3 O-O d4 Bb6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 d6 Qd3 Bd7 Nbd2 a6 Bxc6 Bxc6 Rfe1 Re8 a4 Ba7 b4 b5 axb5 axb5 Ra5 exd4 cxd4 Bb6 Rxa8 Bxa8 Bxf6 Qxf6 Qxb5 Re7 Qd3 Bb7 Re3 Qf4 Qb5 Qg4 h3 Qf4 g3 Qf6 Kg2 Re6 d5 Re7 Re2 Qa1 Qc4 Ba6 b5 Bb7 Qd3 Qd1 Re1 Qa4 Rb1 Qa7 Nh4 Bc8 f4 Bd7 Nhf3 Re8 g4 Qa4 Kg3 f6 f5 Rb8 Qc3 Kf8 h4 Re8 Kf4 Re7 Nc4 Qa2 Nfd2 Qa7 Nxb6 Qxb6 Qe3 Qa5 b6 cxb6 Rxb6 Be8 Nf3 Rc7 Rxd6 Qa1

This should be the salvage for Black! Next black move will be Rc3!

============

Contributors : Wolfgang Utesch


Thibault de Vassal    (2471)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6 O-O Bc5 c3 O-O d4 Bb6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 d6 Qd3 Bd7 Nbd2 a6 Bxc6 Bxc6 Rfe1 Re8 a4 Ba7 b4 b5 axb5 axb5 Ra5 exd4 cxd4 Bb6 Rxa8 Bxa8 Bxf6 Qxf6 Qxb5 Re7 Qd3 Bb7 Re3 Qf4 Qb5 Qg4 h3 Qf4 g3 Qf6 Kg2 Re6 d5 Re7 Re2 Qa1 Qc4 Ba6 b5 Bb7 Qd3 Qd1 Re1 Qa4 Rb1 Qa7 Nh4 Bc8 f4 Bd7 Nhf3 Re8 g4 Qa4 Kg3 f6 f5 Rb8 Qc3 Kf8 h4 Re8 Kf4 Re7 Nc4 Qa2 Nfd2 Qa7 Nxb6 Qxb6 Qe3 Qa5 b6 cxb6 Rxb6 Be8 Nf3 Qa7 g5 fxg5+ hxg5 hxg5+ Nxg5 Qa2

Now black has to find a perpetual check.

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Telmo Escobar    (2107)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 f3 O-O Qd2 Nc6 Bc4 Bd7 O-O-O Rc8 Bb3 Ne5 Kb1 Nc4 Bxc4 Rxc4 g4


A critical position for Black

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2107)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 f3 O-O Qd2 Nc6 Bc4 Bd7 O-O-O Rc8 Bb3 Ne5 Kb1 Nc4 Bxc4 Rxc4 g4 b5 b3


Refutation of the whole of Black strategy?

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2048)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 f3 O-O Qd2 Nc6 Bc4 Bd7 O-O-O Rc8 Bb3 Ne5 Kb1 Nc4 Bxc4 Rxc4 g4 b5 b3 Rc8 Ndxb5 a6 Nd4 Qc7 Nde2

with the idea of Be3-d4 and eventually h2-h4 or even g4-g5. Black has not any compensation for the pawn and the probable result is an easily won endgame for White.

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Thibault de Vassal    (2522)
e4 e6 d4 f5

The 'Kingston Defence' is characterised by the opening moves:

1.e4 e6
2.d4 f5

It can also be reached after the transposition of moves 1.d4 f5 2.e4 e6 — a form of Staunton Gambit Declined.

The first record of the defence being played is Schiffers-Chigorin, 1880. The first record of a win by Black is the 1892 victory of Elson over Emanuel Lasker. It remains obscure, but has considerable surprise value.

The Kingston Defence shares a weakness with the French Defence — in the form of the constrained queen's bishop -- and a strength with the Dutch Defence — namely the early thrust of the f-pawn, which often supports a knight on e4. (These French and Dutch similarities led to the first, uncomfortable name for the defence: Frutch.) White's decision at move three tends to define the nature of the game that follows.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5


============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson

In general, Black usually gets a nice game in this, the Advance variation of the Kingston Defence, as soon as White has played e5.


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7



============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson

If Black plays ..c5 immediately, 4.d5 is uncomfortable.


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nf3



============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson

A good waiting move. White is likely to play Nf3 at some point. (An immediate 4.f4 admits that Black has determined the closed nature of the game.)


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nf3 c5



============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson

The obvious freeing move, but it will disturb very weak players of White. If 5.dc then 5.. Ng6 and Black can target both of White's advanced pawns with natural moves such as ..Nc6, ..Qa5+ and ..Qc7.


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nf3 c5 c3 Nbc6



============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson

Black has more space on the queenside, and will fianchetto his queen bishop to bear down on White's kingside and deter a pawn thrust to d5.

Black's rook will contest the c-file.

With the centre almost blocked, Black may decide to put his King on e7 or f7, creating the opportunity for a kingside pawn storm, which might catch out a White who is unfamiliar with the defence.




Thibault de Vassal    (2514)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5

The Exchange Variation of the Kingston Defence sets Black the toughest test.,

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson, Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2514)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5

So how does Black propose to defend the f5 pawn?

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson, Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2522)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bd3

This aggressive but natural developing move elicits a very sharp response from Black.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson, Thibault de Vassal


Thibault de Vassal    (2522)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bd3 Nc6 Bxf5

Black's fifth move now hits two pieces simultaneously.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson, Thibault de Vassal


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bd3 Nc6 Bxf5 Qf6 Qd3 Nxd4

Black takes back the pawn and threatens the Bishop.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bd3 Nc6 Bxf5 Qf6 Qd3 Nxd4 Bxh7 Ne7

Black now threatens ..g6 to trap the White bishop.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bd3 Nc6 Bxf5 Qf6 Qd3 Nxd4 Bxh7 Ne7 Be3

Black must defend or move the Knight.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bd3 Nc6 Bxf5 Qf6 Qd3 Nxd4 Bxh7 Ne7 Be3 Ne6 Be4 Qxb2 Qc3 Qxc3+

If Black retreated with Qb5, the Queen could continue to be chased around the board.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nc3

Good move, but not the best, as White may want to place pressure on Black's d5-pawn (yes, it will get there!), via c4 and then Nc3 and then Qb3. This formation is particularly powerful for White if Black castles kingside and leaves his King on g8.

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar, Gavin Wilson


Miguel Pires    (2143)
e4 e5 Bb5 c6 Ba4 Nf6 Qe2 Bc5 Nf3 d5 exd5

Only whay to play, any other move is bad. Now black as to decide what to do, but the game is hard!!!!!!!

============

Contributors : Miguel Pires


Mark Hailes    (1800)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 e3 b6

The fight in the Nimzo often revolves around controlling the square e4. If white manages to force through e3-e4 unhindered, the b1 bishop will be released and white will have a dominating position in the centre, often with the threat of playing e5 gaining space and a kingside initiative. So Black plans Bb7 controlling the long diagonal and in particular the square e4.

============

Contributors : Wladyslaw Makosiej, Mark Hailes


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 c4



============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson

This variation in the 'Advance' variation of the Kingston Defence has the merit of strengthening White's extended pawn centre. It also prevents ..Nd5, but Black wasn't intending that.


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 c4 c5



============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson

Black immediately challenges White's centre, and prepares a possible ..Nc6.


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 Nc3 d5

Black now contests the centre, forcing White to decide immediately whether to advance or exchange the e-pawn.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 Nc3 d5 exd5 exd5 Nf3

A simple developing move, waiting to see what Black has in mind.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 Nc3 d5 exd5 exd5 Nf3 Be7

Black needs to protect his dark-square weaknesses and to defend against a likely Nf6 pinned by Bg5.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 Nc3 d5 exd5 exd5 Nf3 Be7 Ne5

This may be premature. The threat of Qh5+ g6 Nxg6 is enticing, but Black's natural reply stops this right away.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 Nc3 d5 exd5 exd5 Nf3 Be7 Ne5 Nf6 Bg5 O-O

But Black puts an end to that plan once and for all.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 Nc3 d5 exd5 exd5 Nf3 Be7 Ne5 Nf6 Bg5 O-O Bd3 c6

Passive, but Black's development of his queenside pieces is slightly tangled. He'd like to have played Nbd7 immediately, but of course Bxf5 is White's simple riposte.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 Nc3 d5 exd5 exd5 Nf3 Be7 Ne5 Nf6 Bg5 O-O Bd3 c6 O-O Ne4

White should not take on e4 because Black gets a strong pawn centre. Black's knight is destined for d6, from where it can defend the f5 pawn.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Kieran Child    (1600)
Nf3 d5 e4 dxe4

Zucketort gambit accepted.

Black's usual reply to an unorthodox opening. It is sound, but only if black recognises he shouldn't try and hold on to the pawn forever.

Chessbase considers this 54% win for white

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 dxc4 Bxb7 Nd7 Bxa8

White may well be writing 1-0 on his scorecard by this stage, but it's not completely his. Black will look for speedy development to keep white pinned to the first rank.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 dxc4 Bxb7 Nd7 Bxa8 Qxa8 Nf3

Logical development, but a blunder, allowing black's superior position and development to quickly gain the initiative.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 dxc4 Bxb7 Nd7 Bxa8 Qxa8 f3

The best move, though the often perceived attack on the black bishop is clearly non-existant. This move also weakens the kingside further, allowing bishop or queen checks later. Black will aim to exploit this. White will aim to defend any attacks and hold on to the exchange.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
Nf3 d5 e4 dxe4 Ng5

The obvious continuation perceived from the moment white played e4. White aims for early attacks on f7, and this move also threatens to regain the pawn. If black defends the pawn, the attack on f7 will look to be exploited, if black aims for natural development and prevention of an early tactical trick, he will be ok.

Chessbase considers this 49% win for white

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
Nf3 d5 e4 dxe4 Ng5 f5

A seemingly harmless move, but one that significantly weakens e6, allowing for an early f7 tactic. If white doesn't take the opportunity immedietly, e5 is possible, kicking back the white knight and giving black a good game a pawn up.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
Nf3 d5 e4 dxe4 Ng5 f5 Bc4

Most players would be able to spot this over the board. It's the best, and it exploits black's lack of king protection.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
Nf3 d5 e4 dxe4 Ng5 f5 Bc4 Nh6

The only move which seeks to directly protect f7, but a blunder, and a move that shows black's reluctance to gambit a pawn back.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
Nf3 d5 e4 dxe4 Ng5 f5 Bc4 e6

An ugly looking gambit, but one which black should be prepared to play in order to prevent an overwhelming white attack.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
Nf3 d5 e4 d4

Zucketort gambit declined - advance variation

The least favourable way to decline the gambit. Black aims primarily to get an advanced centre, and limit queenside development, but white can often penetrate through this.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
Nf3 d5 e4 d4 c3

A typical way to counter blacks plans. White aims for development of the c3 knight, and for a weak black pawn structure.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
Nf3 d5 e4 d4 Bc4

An aggressive reply to black's premature pawn push. White prepares for quick castling and hits the f7 square. By controlling d5, this move also makes the d4 pawn look vulnerable.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
Nf3 Nf6 Nc3

Reti - Van Geet

A hypermodern move and one that refuses to confirm central pawn structure. However, after blocking the f pawn, this block of the c pawn can be considered weak and restrictive. If black plays d5 and c5, he can often get a good game.

ChessBase considers this a 49% win for white - lower than the average opening.
============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
Nf3 Nf6 b4

Santasiere's folly

A move so named because, when it was first played by Anthony Santasiere, he commented "oh dear, I meant to play it to b3!" Like the Sokolsky though, it is seen by many as more than a Basmanesque joke. White will aim to play a further b5, Bb2 and a4, gaining much queenside space and restricting the development of black's queenside rook and knight. Black will aim to prevent this queenside space with quick counter attacks on the queenside.

ChessBase considers this 55% win for white

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Nc6 Qh5+ g6 Nxg6 Nf6 Qh4

Equal popularity with the superior Qh3, but a blunder, as the queen is now set up for the rook to fork it with the e4 pawn.

ChessBase considers this a 60% win for black, and furthermore, 64% if he finds the correct reply.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Nc6 Qh5+ g6 Nxg6 Nf6 Qh4 hxg6

The most aggressive and risky move. Few draws emerge from this position. Black's aim is to get white's queen into the corner and out of the way so he can launch a mating attack on the white king, something he's willing to sacrifice the rook for. Taking the rook is sound though, as all of black's attacks can be easily seen off.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Nc6 Qh5+ g6 Nxg6 Nf6 Qh4 Rg8 Nxf8

Most frequently played, but probably a blunder. Black's attack is now tremendous.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Nc6 Qh5+ g6 Nxg6 Nf6 Qh3 fxe4

The most common move, and a double edged one. Black aims to gain a huge lead in development, the initiative and a better position with d5. White can take the rook, technically safely, but will need to defend against a big attack in order to win the endgame.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kjetil Prestesaeter    (1600)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 Nf6

Black defends the weak d5 square, and also possibly has intentions of this knight moving to e4 at some point. If white wants any reconciliation for the gambitted pawn, he needs to continue the attack.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child, Kjetil Prestesaeter


Kieran Child    (1600)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 Nf6 Qb3

The move which keeps white momentum, looking at d5 and b7. They cannot both be defended and so black will need to concede a pawn, leading to equal material, but black has a very slight edge on position.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
e4 e5 f4 c5

Mafia defence

Black's aim is to prevent d4 being played and thus marginally restricting white's hopes of a recapture on f4. This has yet to see any success though, and Bc4 and d3 by white seems to refute it pretty well.

Chessbase considers this 38% won for black

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Terry Godat    (2036)
e4 e5 f4 Nf6

Wade defence

While looking tactically sharp, this move offers black few chances, and blocks off the queen's path to h4. If white transposes this with Nc3 into the vienna gambit, or Bc4 into the greco gambit, black should be ok. But if white plays fxe5 then Nf3, black's knight looks very out of position.

Chessbase considers this a 42% win for black.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child, Terry Godat

I have played this move often in blitz games and rarely had much trouble equalizing. Fischer got little if any advantage against Wade.


Kieran Child    (1600)
e4 e5 f4 Qf6

Norwald variation

An uncommon response as it brings out the queen (much too early) and blocks the g8 knight, but it does put black clear material up and with no obvious tactical flaws.

Chessbase considers this a 38% win for black, but it should be noted that it mostly just gets played experimentally by players expecting a loss.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
e4 e5 f4 Qf6 Nf3

The typical, and arguably best way to counter the Norwalds gain in material is to seek a lead in development. Nf3 does just that, it brings the knight to a comfortable square and challenges e5, forcing black to move the queen again.

Chessbase considers this a 52% win for white.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
e4 e5 f4 Qf6 d4

Norwald variation - Electric eel attack

Possibly the least played opening to still have a name. On bigbase9, only 4 games played d4 in response to the Norwald and thus it is hard to analyse. Black doesn't have any immediete wins though, and after the pawn takes on d or e, white will play e5 and Nf3 for an OK game.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
h4 e5 Rh3 d5 Re3 Nc6 d4 e4 c4 Nf6 cxd5 Nxd5

And black falls into it, the knight actually never defended d5 as it was overloaded on e4, this move allows Rxe4

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
h4 e5 Rh3 d5 Re3 Nc6 d4 e4 c4 Nf6 cxd5 Qxd5

Black's queen looms over the centre and looks to dominate, but white's game isn't totally lost.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Lazaro Munoz    (1785)
h4 d5

Kadas opening.

Black prevents the rook from developing. White's only plan has been destroyed. The type of player who would play h4 is the same player who would follow up with h5, trying to develop the rook again to h4 this time.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child, Lazaro Munoz


Kieran Child    (1600)
h4 d5 h5 e5

Again, black refutes white's ideas, and gets the centre he wanted. White will be looking for an early kingside attack.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
h4 d5 h5 e5 h6 gxh6

Stormtrooper gambit accepted

This is a blunder, but almost nobody will be aware of that. Accepting the pawn in this way significantly weakens black's queenside.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
h4 d5 h5 e5 h6 gxh6 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Nf6

The best move. White will recapture the pawn on h6, but black won't lose any more material than that.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
h4 d5 h5 e5 h6 gxh6 d4 exd4 Qxd4 f6 Nc3

And white will get a good game through Bf4, e4 and castling queenside. It is unclear why, being a pawn up, black is so often loses these games.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
Nf3 d5 e4 dxe4 Ng5 Nf6

The most common reply. Black develops naturally and defends the e4 pawn. White still has the initiative though.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
Nf3 d5 e4 dxe4 Ng5 Nf6 Nc3 Bf5 Bc4 e6 f3 exf3

Probably not the best option, white will soon damage black's position by taking on f7, thus pinning the e6 pawn, and taking on f5.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Toon Pepermans    (1992)
d4 e5

Englund gambit (/Charlick gambit)

Black's aim is to avoid closed systems and castle early, though nowadays this move is rarely seen without the follow up trap. In case the multiple follow up traps appeal to anyone reading this, remember that this opening is never seen at grandmaster level, emphasising its hideous unsoundness.

-K.Child

===========
1. d4 e5
{The Seccond best first move gambit in Chess. The authority is GM Stefan Bücker, who wrote one of the bibles of unorthodox openings, with his book "Englund Gambit" (1988). He has touched upon the opening in later collumns both at chesscafe.com and in his magazine; Kaissiber. The conclusion seems to be that White is better with acurate play, but OTB White usually avoids those main lines.}

2. dxe5 Nc6
(2... d6 "Hartlaub-Gambit")

3. Nf3 Qe7
(3... f6 "Soller Gambit")
(3... Nge7 "Zilbermints Gambit")
{Now White can chose between several playable lines:}

A) 4. Bf4 {Grob Variation}
B) 4. Qd5 {Stockholm Variation}
C) 4. Nc3
D) 4. e4

-P.Valle, 5th Nov 2010

============

Contributors : Kieran Child, Paul Valle, Toon Pepermans


Kieran Child    (1600)
d4 e5 dxe5 d6

Hartlaub variation

The initial idea of Henry Charlick when playing the Englund. It's more respectable than the modern trap, but is unsound. Black aims for early development and castling. White will aim to not stray too far behind development-wise, and win a pawn-up endgame.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
d4 e5 dxe5 f6

Soller's gambit

Similar idea to the Hartlaub gambit but black chooses not to sacrifice his centre pawn.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
d4 e5 dxe5 Nc6

An understandable move. Black attacks the e5 pawn and stakes a claim for the centre.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
d4 e5 dxe5 Nc6 f4

Purely for those scared of black's opportunity for setting up traps. Inferior to Nf3, but stopping any black play for good.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
d4 e5 dxe5 Nc6 Nf3 Qe7

Early queen development to set up an unsound trap, but the most popular black continuation.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
d4 e5 dxe5 Nc6 Nf3 Qe7 Bf4

Defends the pawn, and lures black into going for the win.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
d4 e5 dxe5 Nc6 Nf3 Qe7 Bf4 Qb4+ Bd2 Qxb2

Regains the pawn, and the trap is set. Black's queen is in an awkward position though.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
e4 e5 Bc4 f5

Calabrese countergambit

A relative of the latvian gambit. Black's aim is a subtle exploitation of white's early bishop choice. He seeks to play a quick d5 and gain the centre with a tempo. White can just play like a kings gambit declined with a tempo up.

Chessbase considers this a 61% win for black, unusually high, and probably because of the many sticky situations white can find himself in if he is too aggressive.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
e4 e5 Bc4 Nf6

Berlin defence

The standard reply. Black develops normally and will aim to play Nc6 and Bc5 and castle for a typical open game. This move does justify white's early bishop move though, as he can now play d3 and get a middlegame with two active bishops.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
e4 e5 Bc4 b5

Andersson gambit

Black gambits a pawn for some central control. This is unsound though, as even if white accepts the pawn, black will still have trouble playing d5 effectively.

Chessbase considers this 23% win for black.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Nicolas Vedovotto    (2039)
Na3

The Durkin

Named after American master, Robert Dirkin, who probably would have known better than to play it anyway. This is a very strange place to develop the knight. If white wanted the knight to exert central control, Nc3 is better. If his aim is to keep the c pawn flexible, the English, or even the Saragossa is preferable. White's aim will be to move this knight yet again, probably to c4. Black is fine developing normally.

Chessbase considers this a 54% win for white.



============

Contributors : Kieran Child, Peter Marriott, Nicolas Vedovotto


Thibault de Vassal    (2514)
Na3 d5 g4 Bxg4

Now the question : Did Black win the game already ? :) .. Such strange openings have at least the merit to create real challenges IMO.

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Roberto Migliorini    (2058)
c4 b5

Jaenisch gamnbit

Never been an especially popular opening, the Jaenisch gambit is a theoretically unsound attempt at getting an interesting game out of the English. Black aims to quickly develop the bishop to b7 and gain central control, though he is not without some tactical traps on the queenside. White can easily fight for a solid centre, and start some counterplay while black is trying to regain the pawn.

Chessbase considers this a 34% win for black, 32% if white accepts the pawn.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child, Roberto Migliorini


Kieran Child    (1600)
Nf3 Nf6 b4 e5

I'll call this idea the "Rebaudo variation" because, in all my time playing this opening, he's the first person to play it against me, and I actually think it looks quite good. Black threatens to stop any hope white had of queenside space by capturing the pawn on b4. This move is also more forceful than the common e6 as b5 now falls foul to e4 and black has the advantage.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
e4 e5 d4 Qh4

A variation from the centre game that doesn't have a name (so we can call it the Child variation) but probably should, because IMO it's the best reply. Black manages to avoid any tactical traps from the Danish, and plays on the fact that d4 weakens the c3 square, allowing the knight to be pinned should it ever choose to go there.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
e4 e5 d4 Qh4 Qd3

Deals with the threat, but blocks in the f1 bishop and doesn't do much in the way of development. If white can play Nf3 soon, it could be all over for black.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
e4 e5 d4 Qh4 Qd3 d5

A nice move, and black has avoided any white tricks. This seems to give equality.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
e4 e5 d4 Qh4 Nc3 exd4

Black ignores the fact that his moves should always mean that an attack on his exposed queen isn't possible. This doesn't.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nf3 c5 Be3

Not recommended. Puts pressure on Black to decide about the c-pawn, but Black wants to play ..cd here anyway.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nf3 c5 Be3 cxd4 Bxd4 N8c6 c3 Nd5 Bc4 Nxd4 cxd4 Qa5+ Qd2

Appalling, because Black can now pin the Q with his Bishop currently on f8.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Kostis Megalios    (1400)
d4 d5 e4

The Blackmar-Diemer Gambit.
============

Contributors : Paul König, Kostis Megalios


Paul König    (2287)
d4 d5 e4 dxe4 Nc3 Nf6

Usually accepted by black. The pawn is still defended by the knight on f6.

============

Contributors : June Lorena


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 Nc3 d5 exf5

reaches the same position as 4.exd5. Black of course replies 4. ..exf5.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Kieran Child    (1600)
d4 f5 e4 fxe4

Staunton gambit accepted.

White has now opened up both bishops and will look to attack the awkward-looking e4 pawn in the process. Black may try and hold on to the pawn but probably shouldn't, as white has some tactical ideas around Qh5+ Instead, attempts at castling kingside safely should be preferred.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nf3 Be7

Prevents an immediate Bg5 by White. Black wants to avoid playing ..d6 or ..d5 for as long as he can.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nf3 Be7 c4

This could be White's strongest move. It may not seem obvious now, but if Black castles kingside, then White pressurises d5 with Nc3 and Qb3, which also bears down on b7 and the black king on g8.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nf3 Be7 c4 Nf6

Black has to play this some time. Why not now?

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nf3 Be7 c4 c6

Makes it clear how Black intends to defend. Queenside castling looks unlikely now.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nf3 Be7 c4 Nf6 Ne5

This seems premature, as Black can nudge it away immediately.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Kieran Child    (1600)
e4 e6 Nf3

Perhaps more modest than other options, white develops normally and will possibly look to castle kingside regardless of black's plans.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bc4 c5

Black continues his usual counterattack against the base of the White pawn chain.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bc4 c5 dxc5

Perhaps White is hoping to exploit Black's backward d-pawn. Presumably he does not believe he can hang on to this one-pawn advantage.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bc4 c5 dxc5 Ng6

Black attacks two pawns at once!

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bc4 c5 dxc5 Ng6 Nf3 Bxc5 O-O Nc6 Bg5 Qc7 Re1

White decides that if Black is going to take the e-pawn, the Bishop may be able to pin the Knight against the Queen. But 9.Nc3, threatening 10.Nb5 might have been more active.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bc4 c5 dxc5 Ng6 Nf3 Bxc5 O-O Nc6 Bg5 Qc7 Re1 Ngxe5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Bf4

The natural step in his plan, but sadly it does not work. The position is now -+. Black is at least a pawn ahead.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Kieran Child    (1600)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 Bc4 g4 Ne5 Qh4+

Black has the advantage both tactically and positionally. He will follow up with Nh6 and d6.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 h4 g4 Ne5 Nc6

Probably the most "correct" move. Depending on white's response, black either clutches on to his pawn advantage or gains a good position.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 h4 g4 Ne5 Nc6 Nxg4 d5

Black has a big spacial advantage.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 h4 g4 Ne5 Nc6 Nxc6

White will push d4 and get central control. Black could make those f and g pawns an annoyance though.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 c3 Nf6 d4 exd4

Most common move at club level. Black assumes he has won a pawn after an exchange on d4. While he can sometimes be confronted with a lack of spacial allowance after e5, this isn't too bad for black.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Kieran Child    (1600)
d4 Nf6 g4 Nxg4

Most common reply to a gambit black hasn't ever seen.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 c4 c5 Be3

White is unaware of Black's plan to attack the e5 pawn.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 c4 c5 Be3 cxd4 Bxd4

The logical continuation. Black has a backward d-pawn, but it counts for little here.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 c4 c5 Be3 cxd4 Bxd4 Nbc6 Nf3

Developing, but concedes the dark-squared Bishop if Black wants to take it.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 c4 c5 Be3 cxd4 Bxd4 Nbc6 Nf3 Ng6

Black continues the plan to attack the e5 pawn, a task White has made easier by making it impossible to play f4 quickly.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 c4 c5 Be3 cxd4 Bxd4 Nbc6 Nf3 Ng6 a3 Qc7 Nc3 Ngxe5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Nb5 Qb8 Qh5+ g6 Qe2 Bg7 f4

The 'refutation' to Black's capture of the e-pawn.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 c4 c5 Be3 cxd4 Bxd4 Nbc6 Nf3 Ng6 a3 Qc7 Nc3 Ngxe5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Nb5 Qb8 Qh5+ g6 Qe2 Bg7 f4 a6

But Black can fight back.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 c4 c5 Be3 cxd4 Bxd4 Nbc6 Nf3 Ng6 a3 Qc7 Nc3 Ngxe5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Nb5 Qb8 Qh5+ g6 Qe2 Bg7 f4 a6 Nc3

Looks natural, but overlooks Black's response.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 c4 c5 Be3 cxd4 Bxd4 Nbc6 Nf3 Ng6 a3 Qc7 Nc3 Ngxe5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Nb5 Qb8 Qh5+ g6 Qe2 Bg7 f4 a6 Nc3 Nf3+ Qxf3 Bxd4

Black is now clearly ahead.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bc4 a6 Nf3 b5 Bb3 Bb7 Bg5 c5

Now Black gains the spatial advantage.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bc4 a6 Nf3 b5 Bb3 Bb7 Bg5 c5 dxc5 Bxf3 Qxf3 Nbc6 O-O Nxe5

Black is materially ahead, and White has no compensation for the pawn.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 f3 fxe4

Kicking off a sequence that forces a win for Black.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nf3 Be7 c4 Nf6 Ne5 d6 Nf3 O-O

Black will be vulnerable along the a2-g8 diagonal, but he has to castle on one side or the other.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nf3 Be7 c4 Nf6 Ne5 d6 Nf3 O-O Nc3 Nc6 Bd3

How will Black keep the f5 pawn protected?

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nf3 Be7 c4 Nf6 Ne5 d6 Nf3 O-O Nc3 Nc6 Bd3 Nb4 Bb1 c6 a3 Na6 O-O d5

Black contests the centre, but creates a hole on e5.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nf3 Be7 c4 Nf6 Ne5 d6 Nf3 O-O Nc3 Nc6 Bd3 Nb4 Bb1 c6 a3 Na6 O-O d5 Ne5 Nc7 c5 Ne4

It's not completely clear what Black's plan is now.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nf3 Be7 c4 c6 Ne5 Nf6 Nc3 O-O Bd3 d6 Nf3 Na6 a3 Nc7 O-O d5

Now Black creates a hole on e5.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bg5

If now Black tries to nudge this Bishop away with ...h6, a nasty hole appears on g6.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bg5 c5 c3 cxd4

Black cannot play an immediate ...Nbc6, because it does not prevent d5. If ...Nbc6, d5 Nbxe5, then d6 wins the knight on e7.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bg5 c5 c3 cxd4 cxd4 Nbc6

Now if White initiates the d5-d6 sequence, Black's queen can escape to a5+, thereby preserving the knight on e7.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 Bd3

Black gets a good game from this variation of the Kingston Defence.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 Bd3 fxe4 Bxe4 Nf6 Bg5 d5

Black appears to be getting a backward e-pawn, but his game becomes very fluid now.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 Bd3 fxe4 Bxe4 Nf6 Bg5 d5 Bd3 c5

Now Black has the better pawn centre.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 Nf6 fxe6 Bd6 exd7+

White does not have to take this final pawn. It serves only to help Black complete his development.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 Nf6 fxe6 Bd6 exd7+ Bxd7

Black is ahead in development, at the cost of a two-pawn disadvantage. It's certainly worth trying as a surprise against a White who thought they were going to have a dull French game.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nf3 Be7 g3 Nf6 Bg2 O-O O-O Ne4 Qd3 d5 c3 Nd7 Bf4 Ndf6 b3

Bizarre. Re1 was the last chance to avoid conceding the advantage to Black.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nf3 c5 c3 Nbc6 Bc4 cxd4 cxd4 Ng6 O-O a6 a3 b5 Be2 Bb7 Be3

Not the best square for this bishop. Black, once castled, will have the option to play ..f4.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nf3 c5 c3 Nbc6 Bc4 cxd4 cxd4 Ng6 O-O a6 a3 b5 Be2 Bb7 Be3 Be7 Nc3 Rc8

A good aggressive move. Black has no immediate need to castle.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nf3 c5 c3 Nbc6 Bc4 cxd4 cxd4 Ng6 O-O a6 a3 b5 Be2 Bb7 Be3 Be7 Nc3 Rc8 d5 Ncxe5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Bf4 Ng6 Be3 f4 Bd4 e5

Strengthening the Black cnetre.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bc4

Not a great move. White does not need to provoke Black to play ..d5.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bc4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bb3 Qe7+

Fritz rates this as 0.37. ..a5 may be better fro Black.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bc4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bb3 Qe7+ Ne5

White should avoid exchanging Queens (i.e. by Qe2), because the White Queen tends to be more powerful in this opening than the Black Queen!

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bc4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bb3 Qe7+ Ne5 Nc6 Bf4 Be6 O-O Nxe5 Bxe5 O-O-O

The position is now almost equal, although Black must be more careful than White to preserve this equality.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bc4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bb3 Qe7+ Ne5 Nc6 Bf4 Be6 O-O Nxe5 Bxe5 O-O-O Re1

The rook lines up against the Black Queen.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bc4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bb3 Qe7+ Ne5 Nc6 Bf4 Be6 O-O Nxe5 Bxe5 O-O-O Re1 Qf7 Nc3

Looks wrong. Once Black plays ..c6, this knight could be stuck. Nd2 is better.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bc4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bb3 Qe7+ Ne5 Nc6 Bf4 Be6 O-O Nxe5 Bxe5 O-O-O Re1 Qf7 Nc3 c6

Appears to open squares near the Black King, but White doesn't seem to be able to attack this weakness.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bc4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bb3 Qe7+ Ne5 Nc6 Bf4 Be6 O-O Nxe5 Bxe5 O-O-O Re1 Qf7 Nc3 c6 Ba4 Ng4

Preparing to capture on e5, then set up a kingside pawn roller with ..g5 etc. Black's King attack will break through before White's.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 Bd3 fxe4 Bxe4 Nf6 Bg5 d5 Bf3 c5

Black's moves are natural and developing.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 Bd3 fxe4 Bxe4 Nf6 Bg5 d5 Bf3 c5 Ne2 Nc6 c3

Black has steadily gained the advantage. It's now about -0.19, according to Fritz.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 Bd3 fxe4 Bxe4 Nf6 Bg5 d5 Bf3 c5 Ne2 Nc6 c3 Be7 Nd2 O-O O-O Bd7 Re1 Rc8 Nb3

We're back to near-equality. This would be worth -0.09, says Fritz, if Black now plays ..c4. Unfortunately he played...

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 g4 fxg4

Fritz advises ..Nbc6 instead, but thismove allows Black to stick to the thematic moves and pawn structure of the Kingston Defence.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 g4 fxg4 Qxg4 c5 Be3 cxd4 Bxd4 Nbc6 Bc3 Nd5

Enables the dark-squared bishop to develop. If Qh5+, then the natural ..g6 is best, resulting in a position valued by Fritz at -1.03.

Sadly, in the Internet game on which this analysis is based (March 2007), Black played ..Ng6 instead of ..Nd5, and should have been punished by a natural Nf3.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nc3 d5 Qh5+ g6 Qe2+ Be7 Bg5 Kf7 Qe5 Nf6 Bxf6 Bxf6 Qxd5+ Kg7 O-O-O c6 Qf3 Be6

Fritz rates this as +0.75 for White, so Black still has work to do from this position. However in an Internet game (March 2007), Black actually played ...Bxd4, and after White's Qf4 (+1.06), Black quickly collapsed after a string of inaccurate moves.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nf3 c5 c3 Nbc6 Bd3 Ng6 Be3 cxd4 cxd4 Bb4+ Nc3 O-O

Fritz rates this as +0.50, but I'm perfectly happy with Black's position.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nf3 c5 c3 Nbc6 Bd3 Ng6 Be3 cxd4 cxd4 Bb4+ Nc3 O-O O-O a6

Black does not want a white Kinght ending up on d6 via b5.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nf3 c5 c3 Nbc6 Bd3 Ng6 Be3 cxd4 cxd4 Bb4+ Nc3 O-O O-O a6 a3

Although White seems to be copying Black, this move is not bad.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nf3 c5 c3 Nbc6 Bd3 Ng6 Be3 cxd4 cxd4 Bb4+ Nc3 O-O O-O a6 a3 Bxc3

A poor move by Black, achieving a position rated by Fritz as +0.87. A restreat of ..Be7 instead would achieve +0.41.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nf3 c5 c3 Nbc6 Bd3 Ng6 Be3 cxd4 cxd4 Bb4+ Nc3 O-O O-O a6 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 b5

Fritz doesn't like Black's position (+0.91), but this move is highly thematic in the Advance variation of the Kingston Defence.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nf3 c5 c3 Nbc6 Bd3 Ng6 Be3 cxd4 cxd4 Bb4+ Nc3 O-O O-O a6 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 b5 Ng5 h6

Looks weakening, but it commences Black's counterattack.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nf3 c5 c3 Nbc6 Bd3 Ng6 Be3 cxd4 cxd4 Bb4+ Nc3 O-O O-O a6 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 b5 Ng5 h6 Nh3 Qh4 Qf3

a4 would have been so much better. Now Black has equality.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nf3 c5 c3 Nbc6 Bd3 Ng6 Be3 cxd4 cxd4 Bb4+ Nc3 O-O O-O a6 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 b5 Ng5 h6 Nh3 Qh4 Qf3 Bb7 Qe2 Rac8 a4 Nce7 axb5 axb5 Bxb5 f4

Black should play ..Nd5 instead.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bd3 Nc6 Ne2 d5

White has decided this is not going to be a highly tactical opening, so Black needs to decide what formation he will settle for, and where his minor pieces will go.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bd3 Nc6 Ne2 d5 c4 Nb4

White's move gives Black the chance to get his queenside pawn structure sorted out with a later ..c6. Fritz says +0.34.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bd3 Nc6 Ne2 d5 c4 Nb4 O-O Nf6 Bg5 Nxd3 Qxd3 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 cxd5 Bd7 Nbc3 O-O-O

Does White have a queenside attack? Will Black recover the pawn?

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bd3 Nc6 Ne2 d5 c4 Nb4 O-O Nf6 Bg5 Nxd3 Qxd3 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 cxd5 Bd7 Nbc3 O-O-O a4 a6 Rfe1 Bd6

Does Black have a kingside attack in mind?

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bd3 Nc6 Ne2 d5 c4 Nb4 O-O Nf6 Bg5 Nxd3 Qxd3 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 cxd5 Bd7 Nbc3 O-O-O a4 a6 Rfe1 Bd6 Qc4 Rde8

A bid for control of the e-file and frees a space for the black king, which might be vulnerable to a rook check -- e.g. Nb5 axb5 axb5 enabling Ra8+.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bd3 Nc6 Ne2 d5 c4 Nb4 O-O Nf6 Bg5 Nxd3 Qxd3 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 cxd5 Bd7 Nbc3 O-O-O a4 a6 Rfe1 Bd6 Qc4 Rde8 b4 Kd8 b5 a5 Rac1 Re7 Qb3 f4

Black (still a pawn down) ignores the threat. The position is worth just +0.16, says Fritz.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bd3 Nc6 Ne2 d5 c4 Nb4 O-O Nf6 Bg5 Nxd3 Qxd3 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 cxd5 Bd7 Nbc3 O-O-O a4 a6 Rfe1 Bd6 Qc4 Rde8 b4 Kd8 b5 a5 Rac1 Re7 Qb3 f4 b6 f3 bxc7+ Bxc7

The only way to capture. Black now has equality. The white rook will capture on e1, and then the black queen will recover the lost pawn by Qxd4.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nh3 c5

Black plays this thematic move, which doesn't make even Fritz's Top 8 list of moves.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nh3 c5 Nf4 cxd4 Bd3

Qxd4 would have been worth -0.28. White seems to think he can punish Black for this unknown defence.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Telmo Escobar    (2048)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Rxe5 c6 d4 Bd6 Re1 Qh4 g3 Qh3 Be3 Ra7 a4 Bg4 Qd3 Bf5 Qf1


Now Black can't avoid the swap of queens as axb5 is threatened!

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Yugi Inving    (0980)
h4 b6


============

Contributors : Yugi Inving
Black want to devloppe their bishop in B7 to chasse the rook. but does black will devlop the rook


Yugi Inving    (0980)
h4 b6 h5



============

Contributors : Yugi Inving
Black got the idea of devlopping the rook in h4 this time.


Yugi Inving    (0980)
h4 b6 h5 e5


============

Contributors : Yugi Inving
Black now start their fight for the center and stop rook total devloppement. but white attack g7 again...


Ulrich Imbeck    (1342)
h4 g6 h5 Bg7

============

Contributors : Yugi Inving

This look like a good error and will force the black to play h6


Ulrich Imbeck    (1342)
h4 g6 h5 Bg7 d4 Nf6


============

Contributors : Yugi Inving, Ulrich Imbeck
Black position their knight in the wrong place.


Ulrich Imbeck    (1342)
h4 g6 h5 Bg7 d4 Nf6 h6

============

Contributors : Yugi Inving, Ulrich Imbeck

Now 0-0 become a reall weak move, and the black bishop is no longer on his best place. Black is in trouble.


Yugi Inving    (0980)
e4 e5 Qh5 Nc6 Bc4 g6 Qf3 Nf6 Qb3 Nd4


Black want a queen or a rook.
============

Contributors : Yugi Inving


Yugi Inving    (0980)
h4 g6 h5 Bg7 d4 Nf6 h6 Bf8

i think black lose time here, because of their knight.

============

Contributors : Pablo Schmid, Yugi Inving


Yugi Inving    (0980)
h4 e5 h5



============

Contributors : Yugi Inving

Black will not understand, but they may see your pawn coming and play h6 before you do, be carefull. a real good player will play h6.


Yugi Inving    (0980)
h4 e5 h5 h6



============

Black have seen that white what to push h6 and stop them.
Contributors : Yugi Inving


Yugi Inving    (0980)
h4 e5 h5 h6 e4


============
the game is like a normal again. a few differance. which are to white advantage even if he lose time, black cannot push the pawn on g5 or g6 if the game is player well.

Contributors : Yugi Inving


Yugi Inving    (0980)
h4 b6 h5 h6


Ouf, i think black was close of their doom.
============

Contributors : Yugi Inving


Yugi Inving    (0980)
e4 e5 Qh5 Nc6 Bc4 g6 Qf3 Nf6 Qb3 Nd4 Bxf7+ Ke7 Qc4 b5 Qb4+ Kxf7 Qc3 Bb4

Black does n't give up the fight for the queeny

============

Contributors : Yugi Inving


Ilmars Cirulis    (1299)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 Ng5 Bc5 Nxf7 Bxf2 Kf1 Qe7 Nxh8 d5 exd5 Nd4 h3 Qf8 c3 Ne4 Qh5+ g6 Qxe5+ Kd8 d6 Ng3+

Black win. :)

============

Contributors : Ilmars Cirulis


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nf3 Be7 Bd3

This creates the classic formation for White. If Black plays ...d5, he creates a hole on e5 for the White night. But if he doesn't play ...d5, then White himself can play d5 and then feed the knight onto e6 via d4.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nf3 Be7 Bd3 d5

Black needs to protect the f-pawn.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nf3 Be7 Bd3 d5 Ne5 Nf6 Bg5 O-O

Simplest and best. Despite White's sub-optimal moves, we shouldn't think Black has achieved equality yet. Fritz rates the position around +0.50.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nf3 Be7 Bd3 d5 Ne5 Nf6 Bg5 O-O c4 c6 Bxf6

Pointless. White should be developing pieces (e.g. Qb3 is best, 0-0 is OK). Now Black gets the upperhand. Fritz says -0.22.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nf3 Be7 Bd3 d5 Ne5 Nf6 Bg5 O-O c4 c6 Bxf6 Bxf6 O-O Qb6

And now it's Black to gets his queen on the b-file.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nf3 Be7 Bd3 d5 Ne5 Nf6 Bg5 O-O c4 c6 Bxf6 Bxf6 O-O Qb6 Qb3

White appears to have ignored Black's attack on d4.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nf3 Be7 Bd3 d5 Ne5 Nf6 Bg5 O-O c4 c6 Bxf6 Bxf6 O-O Qb6 Qb3 Qxd4

White's attack has no merit. Black is clearly ahead -- Fritz rates this about -2.00. End of analysis.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Collin Bleak    (1700)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 dxe5 dxe5 Qxd8+ Kxd8

Both of White's options are played. Black can choose an active or passive defense versus Bc4, while after Bg5 Black must wait for some time for activity.
============

Contributors : Collin Bleak


Collin Bleak    (1700)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 dxe5 dxe5 Qxd8+ Kxd8 Bg5


In this line, Black allows his pawn structure to be damaged, and cannot retain his two bishop advantage, but the resulting position is very solid and Black gets counterplay in the center.
============

Contributors : Collin Bleak


Collin Bleak    (1700)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 dxe5 dxe5 Qxd8+ Kxd8 Bg5 Be6 O-O-O+ Nbd7 Nf3 Bd6 Nb5 Ke7

This position is +/=. In many lines, computers suggest Bxa2, winning three pawns for the bishop, with an unclear postion, but Black needs exceptional care to see those lines through. Working on the center typically leads to equality.

============

Contributors : Collin Bleak


Collin Bleak    (1700)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 dxe5 dxe5 Qxd8+ Kxd8 Bc4 Ke8

This somewhat passive line leaves Black defending for a long time, although according to IM practice, it seems Black can retain the balance.
============

Contributors : Collin Bleak


Collin Bleak    (1700)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 dxe5 dxe5 Qxd8+ Kxd8 Bc4 Ke8 Nb5 Bd6

This is an interesting try. Black gives up the two bishops, but speeds his development and creates a nice hole on e7 for his king. The position is +/=.
============

Contributors : Collin Bleak


Collin Bleak    (1700)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 dxe5 dxe5 Qxd8+ Kxd8 Bc4 Be6

This leads to a very passive endgame for Black, where it seems White needs great patience to accomplish anything against the weak Black pawn structure.

============

Contributors : Collin Bleak


Collin Bleak    (1700)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 dxe5 dxe5 Qxd8+ Kxd8 Bc4 Bb4

Black plays for counterchances, and gets enough activity for equality.

============

Contributors : Collin Bleak


Collin Bleak    (1700)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 dxe5 dxe5 Qxd8+ Kxd8 Bc4 Bb4 Bxf7

Black coordinates play against e4 and f2 and is better than white. =/+.
============

Contributors : Collin Bleak


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nc3

White is still ahead after this move, but it just seems a shotgun approach. Black was likely to play ..a6 soon anyway, rendering Nc3 fairly pointless.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nc3 a6 Nf3 c5 Bg5 cxd4 Nxd4 Qa5

Black now has fluid movement for his pieces, but Fritz still rates this as +0.53 if white plays f4.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nc3 a6 Nf3 c5 Bg5 cxd4 Nxd4 Qa5 Bd2 Qxe5+ Nde2 N8c6 g3 b5 Bg2 Bb7

Naturally. Black begins to scent a kingside attack.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nc3 a6 Nf3 c5 Bg5 cxd4 Nxd4 Qa5 Bd2 Qxe5+ Nde2 N8c6 g3 b5 Bg2 Bb7 O-O Ng6 Re1 Qc7 Nf4 Bc5

Objectively a poor move -- Fritz rates this as virtual equality. But Black's position has shifted from very passive tohighly aggressive. Some Whites may get scared here.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nc3 a6 Nf3 c5 Bg5 cxd4 Nxd4 Qa5 Bd2 Qxe5+ Nde2 N8c6 g3 b5 Bg2 Bb7 O-O Ng6 Re1 Qc7 Nf4 Bc5 Nxg6

White may think he is scuppering Black's plans to castle kingside, but really he's just opening the h-file for the black rook against the white king. Black's kingside attack will play itself now.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nc3 a6 Nf3 c5 Bg5 cxd4 Nxd4 Qa5 Bd2 Qxe5+ Nde2 N8c6 g3 b5 Bg2 Bb7 O-O Ng6 Re1 Qc7 Nf4 Bc5 Nxg6 hxg6 a3

White may think he will be nudging the black bishop soon, or preparing a queenside pawn assault, but ...

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nc3 a6 Nf3 c5 Bg5 cxd4 Nxd4 Qa5 Bd2 Qxe5+ Nde2 N8c6 g3 b5 Bg2 Bb7 O-O Ng6 Re1 Qc7 Nf4 Bc5 Nxg6 hxg6 a3 O-O-O

Black castles into it anyway.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nc3 a6 Nf3 c5 Bg5 cxd4 Nxd4 Qa5 Bd2 Qxe5+ Nde2 N8c6 g3 b5 Bg2 Bb7 O-O Ng6 Re1 Qc7 Nf4 Bc5 Nxg6 hxg6 a3 O-O-O b4 Bxf2+ Kxf2 Rxh2 Rh1

Missing Black's reply.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bg5 c5 dxc5

Black can win back the pawn right away, as he does here. Fritz rates this +1.06, badly overestimating the White position.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bg5 c5 dxc5 Qa5+ c3 Qxc5

Black must take the c5-pawn immediately, also threatening e5.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bg5 c5 dxc5 Qa5+ c3 Qxc5 Nf3 Nbc6

A very natural move, but it does leave the black queen ahead of her troops, and potentially blocked from retreating.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bg5 c5 dxc5 Qa5+ c3 Qxc5 Nf3 Nbc6 Be3

With e5 doubly attacked, White must start hitting the black Queen.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Gavin Wilson    (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bg5 c5 dxc5 Qa5+ c3 Qxc5 Nf3 Nbc6 Be3 Qa5 Ng5 Nxe5 Bd2 N7c6 c4 Bb4 Bxb4 Qxb4+ Qd2 h6

Now an endgame is in sight, Black tries to wreck White's pawn structure.

============

Contributors : Gavin Wilson


Telmo Escobar    (2055)
e3

Yugi Inving:
wow there this is an so-so oppening.
white want to be black... but they dont want to decide in which sort of game we go in.

Telmo Escobar:
this move is to be -eventually- followed by b2-b3, so Black has to be careful despite the slow appearance of the initial move.

============

Contributors : Yugi Inving, Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2048)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 Ng5 Bc5 Bxf7 Ke7 Bb3 Qe8 O-O Rf8 Nc3 d6 Nd5+ Kd8 c3 h6 d4 exd4 Nxf6 Rxf6 e5 Rf5 Nf3 Nxe5

14...dxe5? 15.cxd4 would be quite unsavory for Black. But also after the textmove White has clearly a huge positional advantage, mainly due to the ridiculous position of the Black king.


============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2048)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 Ng5 Bc5 Bxf7 Ke7 Bb3 Qe8 O-O Rf8 Nc3 d6 Nd5+ Kd8 c3 h6 d4 exd4 Nxf6 Rxf6 e5 Rf5 Nf3 Nxe5 Nxd4 Rf6 Be3 Ng4 Re1 Qe5 g3 Qh5


Unclear: Black has still his king misplaced, but his pieces are exceedingly aggressive and White is now forced to play h2-h4.

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2048)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 Ng5 Bc5 Bxf7 Ke7 Bb3 Qe8 O-O Rf8 Nc3 d6 Nd5+ Kd8 c3 h6 d4 exd4 Nxf6 Rxf6 e5 Rf5 Nf3 Nxe5 Nxd4 Rf6 Bc2 Bg4 f3 Bh5


White is still slightly better, but Black has good prospects to equalise

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2048)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 Ng5 Bc5 Bxf7 Ke7 Bb3 Qe8 O-O Rf8 Nc3 d6 Nd5+ Kd8 c3 h6 d4 exd4 Nxf6 Rxf6 e5 Rf5 Nf3 Nxe5 Nh4


Probably best. Now Black has much to be concerned about, as the rook at f5 and c3xd4 are threatened.

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2048)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 Ng5 Bc5 Bxf7 Ke7 Bb3 Qe8 O-O Rf8 Nc3 d6 Nd5+ Kd8 c3 h6 d4 exd4 Nxf6 Rxf6 e5 Rf5 Nf3 Nxe5 Nh4 Rh5 cxd4 Rxh4 dxc5 Qh5 cxd6 Rxh2 Qxh5 Rxh5 dxc7+ Kxc7 Re1 Kc6 Be3


White is winning, due to the inability of Black's king to find shelter

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2048)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 Ng5 Bc5 Bxf7 Ke7 Bb3 Qe8 O-O Rf8 Nc3 d6 Nd5+ Kd8 c3 h6 d4 exd4 Nxf6 Rxf6 e5 Rf5 Nf3 Nxe5 Nh4 Rxf2 Kxf2


Best! Now the king is "threatening" to go to g3 (don't laugh about).
In this position I guess White has better prospects, but as White's king seems to be in danger, I wait for other players to provide analysis demonstrating Black's prospects.

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Mike Hoogland    (1764)
d3

I have seen this move twince. it is a very good move for people that want to play whit black but dont have them.

I play this opening a lot when I want to get an initial passive game.


============

Contributors : Yugi Inving, Jose Fernández Bueno, Mike Hoogland


Adam Goodwin    (1500)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 e4 Nxc3 bxc3

This position gives us a real battle of philosophies! White will give his center all the support it needs, since if he succeeds, then Black will be without space and counterplay.

Black, however, labels White's center as a target and decides to attack it with everything he's got. Black would like to force the advance of a pawn, when the squares the pawns vacate will become available to Black's army.

============

Contributors : Adam Goodwin


Telmo Escobar    (2048)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 g4 e5 Nf5 g6 g5 gxf5 exf5 d5 gxf6 d4 Bc4 Qc7 Qd3 dxe3 O-O-O exf2 Bxf7+ Kxf7 Qd5+ Kxf6 Ne4+ Ke7 f6+ Ke8 f7+ Ke7 Qd2 Qb6 Qg5+ Kxf7 Rhf1 Bh6 Rxf2+ Ke8 Rd8+ Qxd8 Qxh6 Qe7 Nf6+ Kd8 Nd5 Qe6 Qg5+ Kd7 Qg7+ Kc6 Rf6 Kxd5 Rxe6 Kxe6 Qxh8 Nd7


A draw is the likely result as Black can't profit from his slight material advantage without being subjected to a perpetual check.

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Florencio Queiroz    (1444)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Rxe5 c6 d4 Bd6 Re1 Qh4 g3 Qh3 Be3 Bg4 Qd3 Bf5 Qd1 Be4 f3 Bxg3 Qe2 Bd3 Qd2 Nxe3

And the game is won for black.
============

Contributors : Florencio Queiroz


Thibault de Vassal    (2512)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 Ng5 Bc5 Bxf7 Ke7 Bc4 Rf8

The best attempt to save Black, following theory after 6.Bb3

============

Contributors : Thibault de Vassal


Graham Cridland    (1406)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Be7 Qf3 Qc7 O-O-O Nbd7 g4 b5 Bxf6 Nxf6 g5 Nd7

This pawn offer is the only way to effectively follow up on the kingside. After other moves, Black gets time to pressure the e4-pawn.
============

Contributors : Graham Cridland


Graham Cridland    (1406)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Be7 Qf3 Qc7 O-O-O Nbd7 g4 b5 Bxf6 Nxf6 g5 Nd7 f5


This pawn offer is the only way to effectively follow up on the kingside. After other moves, Black gets time to pressure the e4-pawn.
============

Contributors : Graham Cridland


Graham Cridland    (1406)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Be7 Qf3 Qc7 O-O-O Nbd7 g4 b5 Bxf6 Nxf6 g5 Nd7 f5 Bxg5+

The currently approved method. This strategy isn't always enjoyable for Black, as there is no way to maintain the central light squares, and White gets the g-file for his king's rook.

============

Contributors : Graham Cridland


Gabriel Lewertowski    (1700)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Qh4 Nc3 Bb4

The only consistent follow-up. Black reinstates the threat to the e4-pawn.

============

Contributors : Gabriel Lewertowski


Attila Nagy    (1677)
b4 e5 Bb2 Bxb4 Bxe5 Nc6

Black continues with Nc6 development with a tempi

============

Contributors : Attila Nagy


Sebastiano Paulesu    (1969)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 c4 e6 dxe6 Nc6 exf7+ Kxf7

Black position seem very unhappy: the king exposed, two pawns less, but the lead in developement can give some important chances to attack...

============

Contributors : Sebastiano Paulesu


Sebastiano Paulesu    (1969)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 c4 e6 dxe6 Nc6 exf7+ Kxf7 Nf3 Bg4 Be2 Bxf3

This move is very important for the Black's plan.

============

Contributors : Sebastiano Paulesu


Sebastiano Paulesu    (1969)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 c4 e6 dxe6 Nc6 exf7+ Kxf7 Nf3 Bg4 Be2 Bxf3 Bxf3 Qd3

And black is better.

============

Contributors : Sebastiano Paulesu


Alexander Minkin    (1882)
e4 c5 b3 Nc6 Bb2 e5 Bc4 Nf6 d3 d6 Nc3 Be7

6...Be6 7.Nge2! Be7 8.0–0 0–0 9.f4! (That's the way.) 9...exf4 10.Nxf4 Bxc4 11.bxc4 Nd7 12.Ncd5 Nde5 13.Nh5 Re8 14.Qe1 Bh4 15.Qe2 Re6 16.Nhf4 Rh6 17.Ne3 Bg5 18.g3 Rf6 19.Nf5 Qd7 (If 19...Bxf4 20.gxf4! Rg6+ 21.Kh1 Nd7 22.Rg1. I think what I like is that the ideas are simple to understand and very effective. Black is being denied his traditional Sicilian counterplay and forced to engage in a protracted defense of his King.) 20.Qh5 Bh6 21.Nd5

============

Contributors : Alexander Minkin


Telmo Escobar    (2055)
h4 e5 h5 d5 h6 g6


Now white is strategically lost as, after spending three tempi with his "h" pawn, he has no chances to eventually open the "h" file. Now the probable continuation of the game might be both players castling long, after which Black has the upper hand both in the middlegame (due to his superiority in space and centre control) and the endgame (when White pawn at h6 will be a painful weakness).

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Mike Hoogland    (1760)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 cxd5

White exchanges the pawn on c4 for the pawn on c6 (black should take it back with this pawn if black doesn't want to lose any influence in the centre).

As a result, Qb6 after Qb3 on the next move is no longer a strong option. Qxb6 then doubles blacks queenside pawns, leaving them and the b5 square weak. Therefore, after Qb3 black will have to find another way to defend the pawn.

After this, white will try to develop and increase presure on b7 and d5 at the same time.

============

Contributors : Mike Hoogland


Mike Hoogland    (1760)
d4 f5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 g6

Black opts for the Leningrad variation. A sharp opening in which black counterattacks the centre with his pieces.

============

Contributors : Mike Hoogland


Mike Hoogland    (1760)
d4 f5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 g6 c3

White, having not played c4 as in a typical Dutch opening, choses to put the pawn on c3. This has two advantages:

-It reinforces the d4 pawn, so that Bg7 is not putting real pressure on the d4 pawn. Subsequently, the chance of a succesful counterattack by black in the centre has become significantly lower.

-It opens the d1-a4 diagonal for the queen. From b3 the queen can attack the b7 pawn, together with the bishop on g2. Also, because f5 has weakened the black's king position, the queen can give a check on b3 or make castling for black more difficult.


============

Contributors : Mike Hoogland


Mike Hoogland    (1760)
d4 f5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 e6

More solid than g6. After this move, black most commonly plays the stonewall, with d5 and c6, or attacks the centre with d6-e5.

============

Contributors : Mike Hoogland


Mike Hoogland    (1760)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 dxc6 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Qxd4 Nxd4 Bd7

A very useful move. Black prepares castling long and retains the possibility of playing c5. The immidiate c5 chases away the white knight, but weakens the d5 square. White can then develop accordingly and try to take advantage of this weakness.

They say develop knights before bishops, because the bishop often does not know yet where to go. In this case the bishop knows better where to go than the knight. It only has one good square, because on g4 it can be chased away by the useful move f3. The knight on the other hand could go to d7, f6 or even h6.

Black's bishop pair, his control over d5, the fact that his pawn structure has no weaknesses and the weakness of the white pawn on e4 give black an edge.

============

Contributors : Mike Hoogland


Normajean Yates    (1946)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 c5

============

Contributors : Simon Lemay

lead to a more agressive defense for the black

mène a une defense plus agressive pour le noirs, Normajean Yates


Simon Lemay    (1600)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 c5 Nf3 cxd4


============

Contributors : Simon Lemay

easy way for black to equalize

une manière facile d'égaliser pour les noirs


Simon Lemay    (1600)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d5 Ne7 Nc3 b5 d6 Ng6 Nxb5 Qb6 Nc7+



============

Contributors : Simon Lemay

white win the rook and the black king is in bad position

les blancs gagne la tour et le roi noir est en mauvaise posture


Telmo Escobar    (2055)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Be2 a6 O-O Nbd7 f4 b5 Bf3 Bb7 e5 Bxf3 Nxf3 b4 exf6 bxc3 fxg7 Bxg7 b3 Qb6+ Kh1 O-O Ba3 Nc5 Bxc5 Qxc5 Qd3

White has slightly better chances because of his absolute control of light squares and his better pawn structure- but a draw is the probable outcome provided Black defend accurately his inferior position. Advice for Black: play 18...h6 (Nf3-g5 is the current threat) and then "do nothing".
============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2055)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Be2 a6 O-O Nbd7 f4 b5 Bf3 Bb7 e5 Bxf3 Nxf3 b4 exf6 bxc3 fxg7 Bxg7 b3 Qb6+ Kh1 Nf6 f5 e5 Bg5 Qc6 Qe1 h6 Bh4 O-O Rd1 Rfe8


Gligoric-Simagin, Alekhine Memorial 1963. The position is about equal, although Black has some weaknesses that make his position more difficult to deal with. In this kind of situations Gligoric was a true grandmaster and he eventually won the game (1-0 in 56 moves)

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2055)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Be2 a6 O-O Nbd7 f4 b5 Bf3 Bb7 e5 Bxf3 Nxf3 b4 exf6 bxc3 f5 Qb6+ Kh1 cxb2 Bxb2 Qxb2 fxe6 Nxf6 exf7+ Kd7 Rb1 Qc3 Nd4

This is Walker-Bowen, England 1967 (see Chess Informant 4/544). More than merely having compensation for the piece, White is winning because he has four good attacking pieces with plenty of files, rows and diagonals to enjoy, while Black king has no pawn wall to hide behind and his pieces have trouble to play because of the much disturbing f7 pawn.

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2055)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Be2 a6 O-O Nbd7 f4 b5 Bf3 Bb7 e5 Bxf3 Nxf3 b4 exf6 bxc3 f5 Qb6+ Kh1 cxb2 Bxb2 Qxb2 fxe6 fxe6 f7+ Kd8 Nd4 Nc5 Rb1 Qxa2 Qf3 d5 c4 Qxc4 Rb4 Qd3 Nxe6+ Kc8 Qxd3 Nxd3 Rd4 Nb4 Nxf8 Rxf8 Rxb4 Ra7

Black has good winning prospects.

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2055)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Be2 a6 O-O Nbd7 f4 b5 Bf3 Bb7 e5 Bxf3 Nxf3 b4 exf6 bxc3 f5 Qb6+ Kh1 cxb2 Bxb2 Qxb2 fxe6 fxe6 f7+ Kd8 Nd4 Nc5 Rb1 Qxa2 Qf3 d5 c4 Qxc4 Qe3 Rc8 Rbc1 Qb4 Nxe6+ Kd7 Nf4 Qe4 Qh3+ Kc7 Ne6+ Kb8 Rb1+ Nb7 Qb3 d4 Rf4 Qc6 Rxd4 Be7 Rc4 Qd7 Qg3+ Ka7 Qe3+ Kb8 Qf4+ Ka7 Qf2+ Kb8 Rxc8+ Rxc8 f8 Bf8 Nf8 Qd3 Qb2 Qb5 Qa1 Qd3 Ne6 Qc3

Black has no real winning chances because his king is still facing risk, so he is wll adviced to swap queens and accept a draw.

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2055)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Be2 a6 O-O Nbd7 f4 b5 Bf3 Bb7 e5 Bxf3 Nxf3 b4 exf6 bxc3 f5 Qb6+ Kh1 cxb2 Bxb2 Qxb2 fxe6 fxe6 f7+ Kd8 Nd4 Nc5 Rb1 Qxa2 Qf3 d5 Qh3 Kc7 Nxe6+ Nxe6 Qxe6 Bd6 c4

And wins: Black king is now doomed

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2055)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 e3


{after 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5} Another way of avoiding the Indo-Benoni. Not adviced when you are a strong grandmaster playing another strong grandmaster, as this move goes into a variation of the Tarrasch (or Semi-Tarrasch) defence where Black has little trouble to equalise.

But, for you or me, this move is psychologically good as if prevents the opponent to reach the kind of position he's looking for.
============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Lauri Lahnasalo    (1600)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 b5 Nf3 b4

Black releases the tension against b5 pawn.

============

Contributors : Lauri Lahnasalo


Lauri Lahnasalo    (1600)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 b5 Nf3 bxc4 Nc3 d6 e4 g6 Bxc4

The line after 4...bxc4 - and there isn't anything better there for black!?

============

Contributors : Lauri Lahnasalo


Lauri Lahnasalo    (1600)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 b5 Nf3 g6 cxb5 a6

Black still thinks he can get counterplay after exchange, but he doesn't see that he has to do the exchange using his own time while white is able to further develod his attack.
============

Contributors : Lauri Lahnasalo


Lauri Lahnasalo    (1600)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 b5 Nf3 g6 cxb5 a6 Nc3 axb5 e4

Opens the f1-b5 diagonal for bishop. The spot on b5 is about to become a secure base for attack. White threatens the spot with double attack so black is not able to secure it on time.
============

Contributors : Lauri Lahnasalo


Lauri Lahnasalo    (1600)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 b5 Nf3 g6 cxb5 a6 Nc3 axb5 e4 b4

Black is not willing to give his b pawn for nothing.
============

Contributors : Lauri Lahnasalo


Telmo Escobar    (2076)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Ne5 h5 f3 h4 Bf2 Bb7 Be3 Nfd7 Nxd7 Nxd7 Qd2 Be7 d5 Ne5 Bd4 Qc7 Qe3 a6

Black has the better prospects. White has insufficient compensation for the pawn, as Black knight at e5 is terrific and exchanging it for a White bishop is not advisable (too weak dark squares).

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2076)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Ne5 h5 h4 g4 Be2 Bb7 O-O Nbd7 Qc2 Nxe5 Bxe5 Bg7 Bg3 Qxd4 Rad1 Qb6 b3 c5 bxc4 b4 Rd6 Qa5 e5 Nd7 Rxe6+ fxe6 Qg6+ Kf8 Qxe6 Qd8 Qf5+

Draw. Black has nothing better than allowing a perpetual.

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2076)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Ne5 h5 h4 g4 Be2 Bb7 O-O Nbd7 Qc2 Nxe5 Bxe5 Bg7 Bg3 Qxd4 Rad1 Qb6 b3 cxb3 axb3 a6 Rd2 c5 Rd6 Qa5 e5 Nd5 Nxd5 Bxd5 Rxd5 exd5 Qxc5 Rh6 Qxd5 Rd8 Qe4 Kf8

Black has winning prospects.

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2076)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Ne5 h5 h4 g4 Be2 Bb7 O-O Nbd7 Qc2 Nxe5 Bxe5 Bg7 Bg3 Qxd4 Rad1 Qb6 b3 cxb3 axb3 a6 Rd2 c5 Rd6 Bc6 e5 Nd7 Ne4 Bf8 Rfd1 Bxd6 Nxd6+ Ke7 Bf4 Rag8


Analysis by Sergey Shipov. The position looks balanced: White has apparently a reasonable compensation for the exchange, but Black position is solid enough to hold.
============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2076)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Ne5 h5 h4 g4 Be2 Bb7 O-O Nbd7 Qc2 Nxe5 Bxe5 Bg7 Rad1 O-O Bg3 Nd7 f3 c5 Nxb5 cxd4 Nxd4 Qb6 Bf2 g3 Be3 Qd8 f4 Bxd4 Rxd4 Qxh4 Rfd1 Nb6 Rd6 Rac8

Black is better.

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2076)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Ne5 h5 h4 g4 Be2 Bb7 O-O Nbd7 Qc2 Nxe5 Bxe5 Bg7 Rad1 O-O Bg3 Nd7 f3 c5 dxc5 Qe7 Kh1 a6 a4 Bc6 Nd5 exd5 exd5 Be5 f4 Bg7 dxc6 Nxc5 Rd5 Ne4 Be1 Qe6 Rxh5 f5


And Black wins. Aronian-Anand, Mexico World Ch 2007
============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2076)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Ne5 h5 h4 g4 Be2 Bb7 O-O Nbd7 Qc2 Nxe5 Bxe5 Bg7 Rad1 O-O Bg3 Nd7 f3 c5 dxc5 Qe7 fxg4 hxg4 Bd6 Qxh4 Rf4 Qh6 Rxg4 Bc6 Bxf8

It's plain that such a bishop was better than the Black rook.

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2076)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Ne5 h5 h4 g4 Be2 Bb7 O-O Nbd7 Qc2 Nxe5 Bxe5 Bg7 Rad1 O-O Bg3 Nd7 f3 c5 dxc5 Qe7 fxg4 hxg4 Bd6 Qxh4 Rf4 Qh6 Rxg4 Bc6 Bxf8 Qe3+ Kf1 Kxf8 Qc1 Qxc1 Rxc1 Nxc5

Black has a terrific compensation for the exchange.

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Jose Fernández Bueno    (1769)
Nf3 d5 d3

This move encourage black to attack, but white can play an important tactic them with g3 and after, Bg2.

============

Contributors : Jose Fernández Bueno


Telmo Escobar    (2076)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 d6 c3 O-O h3 Na5 Bc2 d5 exd5 e4 Bxe4 Nxe4 Rxe4 Bb7 Qe2 Bf6 d3 Bxd5 Re3 c5 Nbd2

White is slightly better- while there is some compensation for the pawn sacrificed by Black, it does not suffice.

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2076)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 d6 c3 O-O h3 Na5 Bc2 d5 exd5 e4 Bxe4 Nxe4 Rxe4 Bb7 d4

Maybe too naive, as now White has a lot of weak light squares in the centre, so Black prospects improve.

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2076)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 d6 c3 O-O h3 Na5 Bc2 d5 exd5 e4 Bxe4 Nxe4 Rxe4 Bb7 d4 Re8 Bf4 Nc4 Re2 Qxd5


Black has not a reasonable compensation for the pawn.
============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Terry Godat    (2088)
e4 f5

This is Inving gambit. this gambit is the most dengerous weapon to use for black, as it can turn on the face because of Qh5+ the inving Gambit accepted have only four variant possible, After Fxe5. 2... g6, 2... h5 2... Nf6 and 2.. Kf7
the gambit can also be refused with , Nc3, Nf3, d3, f3, g3... or white can play the Advence Inving Gambit Variant (AIGV).

This gambit is not a bad move tough it's is -0.37 for Rybka. ( This opening has no name, i just name it like that for fun) it can also be an inversed From gambit.
============
This gambit, the Fred, is completely unjustified, except as a joke.
Contributors : Yugi Inving, Terry Godat


Terry Godat    (2088)
e4 f5 e5

============

Contributors : Yugi Inving, Terry Godat

Declining the gambit justifies Black's nonsense.


Art Watts    (1404)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Bc4 Bc5 c3



============

Contributors : Art Watts
If black continues with...dxc3, then white has at his disposal, Bxf7+...KxB then white has Qd5+, recovering the piece. I saw this line in ECO.


Roger Whitman    (1971)
e4 e5 Qh5 Nf6 Qxe5 Be7 Qf4 O-O



============

Contributors : Roger Whitman
Black already has more than enough for the pawn.


Roger Whitman    (1971)
e4 e5 Qh5 Nf6 Qxe5 Be7 Qf4 O-O Nc3 d5 e5 Ng4



============

Contributors : Roger Whitman
The only thing Black has done "wrong" is that he could have gotten an even better game by not sacrificing a pawn.


Roger Whitman    (1971)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 Ng5 Bc5 Nxf7 Bxf2 Kf1 Qe7 Nxh8 d5 exd5 Nd4 d6 Qxd6 Nf7 Qc5 d3 e4 c3 Bh4 Bf4 Qf5 Qd2 Nc2



============

Contributors : Roger Whitman

Now Black will win the rook, but his knight may never get out.


Terry Godat    (2036)
e4 e5 f4 Nf6 fxe5 Nxe4 Nf3 Ng5 d4 Nxf3+ Qxf3 Qh4+ Qf2 Qxf2+ Kxf2 Nc6 c3 d6 exd6 Bxd6



============

Contributors : Terry Godat

Black has pretty well bypassed the middle game. White's advantage, if any, is minimal.


Terry Godat    (2036)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nc3



============

Contributors : Terry Godat

Because of Black's response, this move is not very popular, but I believe it may be as good as 3.Nf3.


Telmo Escobar    (2076)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Be2 Bb7 O-O Nbd7 Ne5 Bg7 Nxf7 Kxf7 e5 Nd5 Ne4


As played in Topalov-Kramnik, Wijk aan Zee 2008. White probably has a reasonable compensation for the sacrifice- and indeed Topalov won that game. Yet the definitive evaluation of this idea is still unclear. Notice that White is threatening 15.Nd6+ winning the bishop, otherwise Black would advantageously play c6-c5.
============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Yugi Inving    (0914)
e3 g6 b3 Bg7 Nc3

This is not so bad for white.

if the bishop take the knight, then the black have lost a very valuable piece, the good bishop and has made a fianchetto for nothing except to double some pawn... Bxc3 is very bad for black.
============

Contributors : Yugi Inving


Yugi Inving    (0914)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 b3 Qe5+ Ne2 Qxa1 Nec3 Be6 d4 Nf6 Bd3 Nbd7 Qe2 c6 Bd2 O-O-O O-O Nb6 Na3 Qxf1+ Kxf1 g6

intending Bg7 to finish black developpement and then Rd7 and Rhd8

Black should have near 90% chances of winning in thses cases.
============

Contributors : Yugi Inving


Arne Sigvald Engø    (1800)
Nf3 Nf6 g3 g6 Bg2 Bg7 O-O O-O c4



============

Contributors : Arne Sigvald Engø

A very active move aimed at blocking black in his attempts to establish a pawn center.


Telmo Escobar    (2043)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 f3 Qb6

Achtung! This move is recommended in one of the editions of the Yugoslav Enciclopedia of Chess Openings, even evaluating this position as favouring Black (!). The idea is, apparently, that White is deprived of the natural reply 7.Be3, so Black has (apparently!) the initiative. Let us see why this is wrong.
============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2043)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 f3 Qb6 Be3

The refutation of 6...Qb6?! Now Black should lost some tempo as his queen is in danger.
Let us see why the pawn at b2 is not to be taken.

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2043)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 f3 Qb6 Be3 Qxb2 Ndb5

Threatening both 9.Rb1 winning a queen and -eventually- Nc7+ winning an exchange. So Black's reply is forced.

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2043)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 f3 Qb6 Be3 Qxb2 Ndb5 Qb4


Now it is bad 9.Nc7+ Kd8 10.Nxa8 Qxc3+ as White knight at a8 is lost. So Black seems to be OK after all. Yet the idea has a hole.
============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2043)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Ng4 Bb5 Nc6 Nxc6 bxc6 Bxc6+ Bd7 Bxa8 Nxe3 fxe3 Qxa8

A critical position. In order to understand why a single tempo will be decisive for the evaluation of the position, it's advisable to remember that Siegbert Tarrasch postulated that "two bishops plus a rook are better than two rooks plus a knight". According my oddly uneven experience of near forty years of tournament play, during which I lost to many patzers but beat many masters -and a few grandmasters- as well, I think Tarrasch's axiom is correct most of the time. Indeed, *as most players seem to not know about Tarrasch's axiom*, one of my dirty tricks has been to look for these positions, when my adversary think he -one exchange up- is better, but I -one exchange down- usually know better.

In this position, both Black bishops seem to have excellent prospects and, should my dark bishop be already at g7, I'd be sure that Black has winning prospects.

But it's White turn to move, and...

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2043)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Ng4 Bb5 Nc6 Nxc6 bxc6 Bxc6+ Bd7 Bxa8 Nxe3 fxe3 Qxa8 Qd4

It's only now that I'm ready to concede that White is better, much better in fact! Black has to choose between three terrible moves, as e7-e5 or f7-f6 spoil the -formerly bright- future of his dark colored bishop, while Rh8-g8 leaves his king in the centre forever.

(not that 12.Qd4! is the only move, 12.Nd5 Qb8 13.Qd4! is strong as well. In any case, the verdict is always the same: as horrible a blunder as 6...Ng4? looks, White gets a clear advantage *just because one tempo*, so sharp chess often is).

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2043)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 Bc4


This move has little independent meaning, as Black can enter the main lines if he so wants, yet some White players may have some spetial in mind as we shall see.
============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2043)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 Bc4 Ng4 Bb5+ Kf8 O-O Nxe3 fxe3

Black is positionally brilliant as he has two bishops and his adversary has weakened his pawn structure. Yet now Black has to stand alert, as his next move, if based only upon "general considerations", could be his last move as well...
============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2043)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 Bc4 Ng4 Bb5+ Kf8 O-O Nxe3 fxe3 Nd7 Ne6+


And, naturally, Black resigns. This was Giorgi-Escobar, Buenos Aires (Club tournament) 1976. Please not make it into a "famous game"! It was the only game I lost at that tournament- and the only game my adversary won! In fact I finished 1st, my adversary finished last :)

It's true that i was playing the game after a (memorable) night without sleeping, so I was not precisely awake while playing. But the position is not as easy to play with Black, otherwise I would be able to outplay my adversary anyway. I'm sure that this blunder 10...Nd7?? has been played by other people as well- alas even now I find difficult to renounce to such a natural move...

As you see, both moves I suggest in this position
(10...Nc6!? that sacrifices a pawn, 10...e6!? that sacrifices the square d6) are not trivial.
============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2043)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 Bc4 Ng4 Bb5+ Kf8 O-O Nxe3 fxe3 e6


This seems to weaken square d6, but this is of little significance as Black has absolute control over dark colored squares due to his powerful bishop.
============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2043)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 Bc4 Ng4 Bb5+ Kf8 O-O Nxe3 fxe3 e6 Bc4 Qe7 Ndb5 Be5


What a bishop. Now Black plans to play simply Kf8-g7, etc, and apparently White has little to celebrate.
============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2043)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 Bc4 Ng4 Bb5+ Kf8 O-O Nxe3 fxe3 Nc6 Bc4 Ne5 Ne6+ Bxe6 Bxe6 Kg8

As simple as that! With his excellently placed minor pieces, Black is little impressed and plan to "castle" by means -in due time- of h7-h6 and Kf8-g7. Let us see a posible continuation.

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2043)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 Bc4 Ng4 Bb5+ Kf8 O-O Nxe3 fxe3 Nc6 Bc4 Ne5 Ne6+ Bxe6 Bxe6 Kg8 Bb3 e6 Nb5 Qb6

No it isn't! Now it's not possible 16.Qxd6? Qxb5 nor 16.Nxd6? Rd8, so there is no question that Black has the best of it.

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2043)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 Bc4 Ng4 Bb5+ Kf8 O-O Nxe3 fxe3 Nc6 Nxc6 bxc6 Bxc6 Ba6 Bxa8 Bxf1 Qxf1 Qxa8

Black is a pawn down but this is of no importance in this position. Indeed, Black has "threatening" 15...Bxc3 16.bxc3 Qxe4 or (even!) 16...Kg7 when White, if any, has to play accurately not to going into serious trouble. Remember that pawn weaknesses are particularly serious when there are rooks.

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (2043)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 Bc4 Ng4 Bb5+ Kf8 O-O Nxe3 fxe3 Nc6 Nxc6 bxc6 Bxc6 Rb8 Bd5 e6 Bb3 Be5 Qf3 Qe7

Again, Black has more than enough compensation for the pawn minus. Indeed he's "threatening" Kf8-g7 and White has to play very carefully in order to hold a draw.
============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Mark Hailes    (1800)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 e3 b6 Nge2

Now If black takes the knight on c3 white can recapture with the other knight avoiding doubled c pawns. However, black will most likely avoid this exchange and then the e2 knight will have to move again before the white light squared bishop can get out.

============

Contributors : Mark Hailes


Mark Hailes    (1800)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 e3 b6 Bd3 Bb7

Black controls the long diagonal and attacks the pawn on g2. White would have liked to play Nge2 on the next move, but now that is a pawn sacrifice.
============

Contributors : Mark Hailes


Mark Hailes    (1800)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 e3 b6 Bd3 Bb7 Nf3

White develops the knight and at the same time blocks the attack of black's bishop on the g2 pawn

============

Contributors : Mark Hailes


Benjamin Block    (1397)
f3 e5 g4

Why do you help black to win?

============

Contributors : Benjamin Block


Yugi Inving    (1280)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Nc3 Nc6 e3 g6

Black prepare a fiancetto and since the diagonal c1-h6 is blocked by the pawn on e3, white won't be able to profite of black weakness.

============

Contributors : Yugi Inving


Yugi Inving    (1280)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Nc3 Nc6 e3 g6 Bd3 Bg7 Bd2 O-O O-O a6 Re1 Nb4 a3


Chasing black out of the way, making them exchange and then profite from doubled pawn to push e4
============

Contributors : Yugi Inving


Terry Godat    (2088)
e4 f5 exf5 Kf7

The real inving gambit or the Inving gambit of the king, can also be called the drunked king opening, Kf7 does somewhat something to prevent White plan

============

Contributors : Yugi Inving, Terry Godat

This has been dubbed (allegedly by some Russian players) the Mao Zedong Attack, as it sacrifices pawns for no reason. Black is already completely lost.


Yugi Inving    (1280)
e4 f5 exf5 Kf7 Qh5+ g6 fxg6+ Kg7 Bd3 Nf6 Qg5


preparing gxh7 and prevening black from taking the g6 pawn.
============

Contributors : Yugi Inving


Benjamin Block    (1397)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Bc5 O-O Nf6 d3 d6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 h5 Nxg5 h4 Nxf7

White is happy to fork d8 and h8. But black have a plan.

============

Contributors : Benjamin Block


Terry Godat    (2088)
e4 f5 exf5 Kf7 Qh5+ g6 fxg6+ Kg7 gxh7 Rxh7



============

Contributors : Terry Godat
If Black is rated about 900 points higher than his opponent, he might survive this position.


Terry Godat    (2088)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 h4 g4 Ne5 Nf6 Bc4 d5 exd5 Bd6 d4 Nh5 O-O O-O

============

Contributors : Terry Godat
Theory considers this position to be favorable to Black, but White's next casts doubt on that assessment.


Terry Godat    (2088)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 h4 g4 Ne5 Nf6 Bc4 d5 exd5 Bd6 d4 Nh5 O-O O-O Rxf4



============

Contributors : Terry Godat
I'm involved in a thematic King's Gambit tournament and came across this game (Boehme-Whitman) during my research. I'm astonished that no one ever considered this move before. Rybka considers this move to be at least as good as 10.Nxg4, which is known to be good for Black after 10...Qxh4 11.Nh2 Ng3!


Terry Godat    (2088)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 h4 g4 Ne5 Nf6 Bc4 d5 exd5 Bd6 d4 Nh5 O-O O-O Rxf4 Nxf4 Bxf4

============

Contributors : Terry Godat
Here Black can either play 11...Bf5 or grab the h-pawn. In either case, White has excellent compensation for the exchange. In the game, Black fought an uphill battle for a draw.


Normajean Yates    (1967)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 f3 e5

This e5 advance might be black's best option..

============

Contributors : Benjamin Block, Normajean Yates


Sebastian Boehme    (1836)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5

Black is ready for the fight

============

Contributors : Sebastian Boehme


Sebastian Boehme    (1836)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 g4 h6 Qd2 Nbd7 O-O-O Bb7 h4 b4

White attacks on the kingside, black tries the same on the queenside. The preconditions for a sharp game in the Sicilian defense are being set.

============

Contributors : Sebastian Boehme


Sebastian Boehme    (1836)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 g4 h6 Qd2 b4

A direct attempt by black, asking for trouble.

============

Contributors : Sebastian Boehme


Graham Cridland    (1438)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 b5 e5

White's best move, putting the question to Black as to how to avoid losing a piece.

============

Contributors : Graham Cridland


Graham Cridland    (1438)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 b5 e5 dxe5 fxe5

Black wins the Bg5 after exf6 by ...Qe5+ and Qxg5. The resulting positions permit active play by Black.
============

Contributors : Graham Cridland


Graham Cridland    (1438)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 b5 e5 dxe5 fxe5 Qc7

Black wins the Bg5 after exf6 by ...Qe5+ and Qxg5. The resulting positions permit active play by Black.

============

Contributors : Graham Cridland


Kevin King    (0969)
d4 d5 c4 e6 Nc3 c6

This position is the Semi-Slav Defence by Black.
============

Contributors : Mladen Jankovic, Kevin King


Sebastian Boehme    (1999)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 Be7 Qd2

This move is paving the road for a sharp game, because of the different ways white and black mostly castle here.

============

Contributors : Sebastian Boehme


Sebastian Boehme    (1999)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 Be7 Qd2 O-O O-O-O

White castles queenside, black castled kingside. These are the preconditions for a sharp game in this particular Najdorf variation.

============

Contributors : Sebastian Boehme


Benjamin Block    (1711)
e4 c6 d4 d5 Nc3 dxe4 Nxe4 Nd7 Qe2 Ndf6

Black stop the mate on d6

============

Contributors : Benjamin Block


Benjamin Block    (1711)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 e4 Nxc3 bxc3 Bg7 Bc4 c5 Ne2 Nc6 Be3 O-O O-O Bg4 f3 Na5 Bd3 cxd4 cxd4 Be6 d5 Bxa1 Qxa1 f6

Save the king from Bh6. If black did not played f6. White could play Bh6 and take the rook or Mate on Qg7.

============

Contributors : Benjamin Block


Julien Coll    (1879)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nc6 Nc3 Qc7 Ndb5 Qb8 Be3 a6 Bb6 axb5 Nxb5 Bb4+ c3 Ba5 Nc7+ Qxc7 Bxc7 Bxc7 Qg4 Be5

And Black seem to be OK.

============

Contributors : Julien Coll


Wilhelm Schuett    (1800)
a4

============

Contributors : Benjamin Block, Ruddy Franco, Kostis Megalios, Paul Brand Lyard

This opening is the Ware" opening A4
Mr. Ware, US champion in his time, had
won very much games in tournaments with his
rarely,amazing opening....
What do you play after one a opening a4?
Best move isn' t it to play pawn e5 for blacks?
Blacks to play.

Nota bene

Mr.Paul-emmanuel Brand FRA, Aka
"The Sandra LyardVers13061975",
Inventor Annapurna' chess séries variants said
about this Non- orthodoxe, rarely uses in tournaments by players,afer a long time to try and studied this,that was a precious opening because she can create an big surprise attack on column A,for the oponnent after only twelve moves....

Thé " Meadow Hay" Ware opening' is most strongest than WE believe...2021 July 20th.
Paul,Emma&Sandra Brand-Lyard., Wilhelm Schuett


Normajean Yates    (1858)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Nc6 Qh5+ g6 Nxg6 Nf6 Qh3 hxg6 Qxh8 Qe7 Nc3

Any thoughts on this line? Someone played this [8. Nc3] against me at another correspondence-chess site, and I am ie Black is already in serious trouble after 8. Nc3 fxe4 9. Be2 Nd4 10. O-O. I don't see any counterattack by black!

I mean latvian-fraser is supposed to be in crisis, but is the old main line [ie until black's 7th move] so bad? Or did I blunder? No, I didn't blunder - except by choosing this line [or, except by playing the latvian ;) ]

PS: I (black) managed to win that game because it was no-engines and white got overconfident, but that's another story :) ] For the curious, here is *that* story:

NN v Normajeanyates
chess.com corr no-engines 2008
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 f5 3. Nxe5 Nc6 4. Qh5+ g6 5. Nxg6 Nf6 6. Qh3 hxg6 7. Qxh8 Qe7 8. Nc3 fxe4 9. Be2 Nd4 10. O-O Nxc2 11. Rb1 Nd4 12. d3 Nxe2+ 13. Nxe2 exd3 14. Nf4 Kf7 15. Nxd3 Bg7 16. Qh4 Qe4 17. Qxe4 Nxe4 18. Be3 d6 19. Rfe1 Bf5 20. Red1 Re8 21. Rbc1 c5 22. b3 Nc3 23. Rd2 Bxd3 24. Rxd3 Ne2+ 25. Kf1 Nxc1 26. Rxd6 Nxa2 27. Bxc5 Bf8 28. Rd7+ Ke6 29. Rc7 Bxc5 30. Rxc5 Rd8 31. Ke2 Rd5 32. Rc7 Rb5 33. Rg7 Kf6 34. Rd7 Rxb3 35. Rd2 Nc3+ 0-1

============

Contributors : Normajean Yates


Kostis Megalios    (1400)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 Qb6 Qd2

The very famous poisoned pawn variation. Black will get the b2 pawn, but white will have the initiative.

============

Contributors : Kostis Megalios


Ilmars Cirulis    (1632)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Bc4 fxe4 Nxe5 Qg5 d4 Qxg2 Qh5+ g6 Bf7+ Kd8 Bxg6 Qxh1+ Ke2 Qxc1 Nf7+ Ke8 Nxh8+ hxg6 Qxg6+ Kd8 Nf7+ Ke7 Nc3 Qxc2+ Ke1 d6 Nd5+ Kd7 Qxg8 Qxb2 Rd1 Na6 Qh7 Kc6 Nd8+ Kb5 Qxe4

Black king in deeeep trouble! :)

============

Contributors : Ilmars Cirulis


Terry Godat    (2137)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Bc4 fxe4 Nxe5 Qg5 d4 Qxg2 Qh5+ g6 Bf7+ Kd8 Bxg6 Qxh1+ Ke2 Qxc1 Nf7+ Ke8 Nxh8+ hxg6 Qxg6+ Kd8 Nf7+ Ke7 Nc3 Qxc2+ Ke1 d6 Nd5+ Kd7 Qxg8 Qxb2 Rd1 Na6 Qh7 Kc6 Nd8+ Kb5 Qxe4 Ka5 Rb1 Qxa2 Qd3



============

Contributors : Terry Godat
This forces Black to take the rook. It's over.


Ilmars Cirulis    (1905)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Bc5 b4 Bxb4 c3 Ba5 d4 exd4 O-O Nf6 e5 d5 exf6 dxc4 Re1+ Be6 fxg7 Rg8 Bg5 Qd5 Nbd2 Rxg7 Ne4 Kf8 Bh6 Bg4 Nf6 Qf5 Bxg7+ Kxg7 Nxg4 Qxg4 Nxd4 Qxd1 Raxd1 Bxc3 Nf5+ Kf6 Re3

Sad, but black can't win... :)
============

Contributors : Ilmars Cirulis


Dan Geana    (1921)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Bg5 a6 Na3 b5 Nd5 Be7 Bxf6 Bxf6 c3 O-O

Black tried (A)Ne7,(B)Bb7 and (C)Bg5
============

Contributors : Benjamin Block, Dan Geana


Terry Godat    (2117)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Bc5 b4 Bxb4 c3 Ba5 d4 exd4 O-O dxc3 Qb3 Qf6 e5 Qg6 Nxc3 Nge7



============

Contributors : Terry Godat
This is the main position of the Compromised Defense. Although theory says White has more than enough for the two pawns sacrificed, Black may well be able to survive. White should play either Ne2 or Ba3 next.


Ulrich Imbeck    (1342)
b4 e5 a3 d5


============
Now Black has more space in the important center.

Contributors : Ulrich Imbeck


Ulrich Imbeck    (1342)
b4 e5 b5 d5


============
Now Black has more space in the important center.

Contributors : Ulrich Imbeck


Ulrich Imbeck    (1342)
b4 a5 b5 c5


============
Black wants to close the Queenside.

Contributors : Ulrich Imbeck


Normajean Yates    (1946)
e4 e5 f4 Qh4+ g3 Qe7

This strange-looking move, where black blocks its own b1-Bishop, is nevertheless probably the best! The point of course is to maintain pressure on the e-file as well d1-h4 diagonal. The '4.fxe5 d6!' continuation illustrates this.

============

Contributors : Normajean Yates


Normajean Yates    (1946)
e4 e5 f4 Qh4+ g3 Qe7 fxe5 d6 exd6 Qxe4+ Qe2 Qxe2+ Nxe2 Bxd6

Black has equalised, and obtained a quiet position - the main purposes of the KGD Keene defence.

============

Contributors : Normajean Yates


Normajean Yates    (1946)
b4 d5 Bb2 Qd6 a3 e5 e3

This allows black to equalise by Be6. Is there an improvement?
============

Contributors : Normajean Yates


Sophie Leclerc    (1200)
e4 e5 Nf3 f6 Nxe5 Ne7

This move is simple too. Ne7 take control of both d5 and f5 sqaure, it also control g6 square which just save from a little Qh5+

As for, Qh5+ g6, The queen is attacked, and you lose the knight

Refuting this is not an easy task. And blakc does have well hidden compensation for the pawn. this opening is gived the rating as the halloween gambit.

Black can not come up with many plans, depending where the knight woulg go, Nf3 just mean you have lost a tempo, Nd3 prevent d4, and Nc4 will cause black to play d5 right away, since they don't want a knight on e3.

the f6 pawn can serve later, in attack, with the moves, g5, -h5 g4- h4.

Black has a little initiative, he must not lose to win the game.

============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Sophie Leclerc    (1200)
e4 e5 Nf3 f6 Nxe5 Ne7 Qh5+ g6

Because the king can't move and Ng6 fails to Nxg6, We must and we should play g6. it attacks the queen. Black should still carefull, White as a trap for you
============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Sophie Leclerc    (1200)
e4 e5 Nf3 f6 Nxe5 Ne7 Qh5+ Ng6 Nxg6

White is up a pawn and a knight and preparing a dsicoory check to gain material, taking the knight result in losing the rook. This shown was a mistake does to black in damiano defense.
============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Sophie Leclerc    (1200)
e4 e5 Nf3 f6 Nxe5 Ne7 Qh5+ g6 Bc4


This protect the white queen from being taked, because black is mate is he take, he king doesn't have enough space to live freely.
============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Sophie Leclerc    (1200)
e4 e5 Nf3 f6 Nxe5 Ne7 Qh5+ g6 Bc4 Bg7

The best move, is very easy to miss, but the best choice for black. here, the knight is lost for a poor pawn, we should at least take a pawn. But by doing so, we give compension for black, while we should be the ones to have the compensation, ours attacks is note finished, but we must move our queen. Or we could be even more mean, for a poor player.

============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Sophie Leclerc    (1200)
e4 e5 Nf3 f6 Nxe5 Ne7 Qh5+ g6 Bc4 Bg7 Bf7+ Kf8 Qf3 fxe5

This one of the worse move black can play here.

============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Sophie Leclerc    (1200)
e4 e5 Nf3 f6 Nxe5 Ne7 Qh5+ g6 Bc4 Bg7 Bf7+ Kf8 Qf3 fxe5 Bxg6+

Forcing black to give back the knight and to endure the lost of a second pawn.

As Kg8 fails to Qf7 Mate
============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Sophie Leclerc    (1200)
e4 e5 Nf3 f6 Nxe5 Ne7 Qh5+ g6 Bc4 Bg7 Bf7+ Kf8 Qf3 fxe5 Bxg6+ Nf5 Bxf5

Treatning another discovery check, on d7 then exange the white bishop for black's. White lack developpement, But Nc3, d3, and Be3 are played faster then excepted. White is up two pawn now.

============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Sophie Leclerc    (1200)
e4 e5 Nf3 f6 Nxe5 Ne7 Qh5+ g6 Bc4 Bg7 Bf7+ Kf8 Qf3 fxe5 Bxg6+ Kg8 Qf7+

mate, endgame aleready for black.

============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Sophie Leclerc    (1200)
e4 e5 Nf3 f6 Nxe5 Ne7 Qh5+ g6 Bc4 Bg7 Bf7+ Kf8 Qf3 d6

The great counter attack, Shall the knight leave, Black king take the bishop then the would move the rook on the open file, secure his king, push the a f pawn, develop queen side then bring the a rook on e8, so he take advantage of the tow open files, the f files is bond to open, White as no more light square bishop. From a passive and poor defense, Black would gain a very offensive play.


Bb3 is the best variation.
Leaving white whit a little attack, but after black take the knight with the d pawn, black should stand well.
============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Normajean Yates    (1946)
e4 e5 Nf3 f6 Nxe5 fxe5 Qh5 Ke7 Qxe5 Kf7 Bc4 d5 Bxd5+ Kg6 h4 h5 Bxb7 Bxb7

after this move black gets mated quickly after 10.Qf5+ Kh6 11.d4+ g5 12.Qf7!.

============

Contributors : Normajean Yates


Normajean Yates    (1946)
e4 e5 Nf3 f6 Nxe5 Ne7 Nf3

simple! White is a pawn up, and black has no compensation worth the name.
============

Contributors : Normajean Yates


Normajean Yates    (1946)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 Qf3

Yet another attempt in Najdorf, these lines are more solid than the Poison Pawn ones after 7. f4 Qb6 8. Qd2.

But Qf3 seems to allow black to equalise by h6.

============

Contributors : Sebastian Boehme, Normajean Yates


Normajean Yates    (1946)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 Qf3 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 Qxf6 gxf6

black has equalised. =.

============

Contributors : Normajean Yates


Tano-Urayoán Russi Román    (1944)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 c5 d5 exd5 cxd5 b5 e4 Nxe4 Qe2 Qe7 Bg2 Nd6 Be3 Na6 Nc3 Rb8

============

Contributors : Normajean Yates, Tano-Urayoán Russi Román

Rb8 was played in once and black achieved a draw. Here white continued a4 but I believe black will have problems after Nf3 all black pieces are awkward placed.


Dan Geana    (1921)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Bg5 a6 Bxf6 gxf6 Na3 f5 Bd3 Rg8 g3 Nd4 Nd5 f4

Black obtains counterplay
============

Contributors : Dan Geana


Dan Geana    (1921)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Bg5 a6 Na3 b5 Nd5 Be7 Bxf6 Bxf6 c3 O-O Nc2 Rb8 h4 Ne7

Black tried g6 and Be7
============

Contributors : Dan Geana


Normajean Yates    (1975)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Qxb2 Rb1 Qa3 e5 h6 Bh4 dxe5 fxe5 Nd5

Rybka 3 opening book line. According to the author Jeroen Noomen:

"In 2007 the Poisoned Pawn variation of the Sicilian Najdorf was experiencing a crisis. White players found out that after 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Qb6 8.Qd2 Qxb2 9.Rb1 Qa3 the old move 10.e5!? was not so easy for black and they scored a few impressive victories. The Poisoned Pawn finally refuted? Not really! After 10.e5!? h6 11.Bh4 dxe5 12.fxe5 black has a move that gives him full equality: 12... Nd5!
"


============

Contributors : Normajean Yates


Sophie Leclerc    (1242)
e4 e5 f4 f6 fxe5 Nc6 exf6 Nxf6

Black has now the lead in developpement.

We need to see if he has enough compensation for the pawn he gave up.

============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Sophie Leclerc    (1242)
e4 f5 exf5 Nf6 g4 g6


Covering the check and accepting an isoled pawn.

This position should be correct for white.

Black must find an attack at all cost. A real attack.
============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Sophie Leclerc    (1242)
e4 f5 exf5 Nf6 g4 g6 g5 Ne4 d3

Not the best move. Black will have to play Nd6 anyway.
============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Sophie Leclerc    (1242)
e4 f5 exf5 Nf6 g4 g6 g5 Ne4 d3 Nd6 fxg6


This move surrender the f5 outpost and open the h-file for black. Not so good.
============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Sophie Leclerc    (1242)
e4 f5 exf5 Nf6 g4 g6 g5 Ne4 d3 Nd6 fxg6 hxg6 Bg2 Nc6 Nc3 Nf5

Whit this move, black has now an important treath. the knight manaver f5-d4 and c6-b4 and taking on c2, the classical forks to take a rook.

Of course, White can do something to this treath right away.
============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Sophie Leclerc    (1242)
e4 f5 exf5 Nf6 g4 g6 g5 Ne4 d3 Nd6 fxg6 hxg6 Bg2 Nc6 Nc3 Nf5 Nf3 d6


This move help black to finished their developpement and to find an attack since they are behind in both material and developpement.


============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Sophie Leclerc    (1242)
e4 f5 exf5 Nf6 g4 g6 g5 Ne4 d3 Nd6 fxg6 hxg6 Bg2 Nc6 Nc3 Nf5 Nf3 d6 Bd2 Bg7 h4

If Qe2, and Nc6-d4 bring back the queen to her start square or wins a rook for the knight.

Tought, h4 isn't the best possible move, The problably wat to stop black from castling.

============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Sophie Leclerc    (1242)
e4 f5 exf5 Nf6 g4 g6 g5 Ne4 d3 Nd6 fxg6 hxg6 Bg2 Nc6 Nc3 Nf5 Nf3 d6 Bd2 Bg7 h4 Qd7

Black intention include now Qe6+, Bd7 and 0-0-0
============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Sophie Leclerc    (1242)
e4 f5 exf5 Nf6 g4 g6 g5 Ne4 d3 Nd6 fxg6 hxg6 Bg2 Nc6 Nc3 Nf5 Nf3 d6 Bd2 Bg7 h4 Qd7 Qe2

An error, since she'll ba chased away, and black will be able to castle anyway, now black's position is the best.

============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Sophie Leclerc    (1242)
e4 f5 exf5 Nf6 g4 g6 g5 Ne4 d3 Nd6 fxg6 hxg6 Bg2 Nc6 Nc3 Nf5 Nf3 d6 Bd2 Bg7 h4 Qd7 Qe2 Ncd4 Qd1 Qe6+ Kf1 Qf7 Nxd4 Ng3+ Ke1 Bxd4


Black mate treath force white fo exchange queens, lose the rook for the knight and to have a bad pawn structure.
============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Sophie Leclerc    (1242)
e4 f5 exf5 Nf6 g4 g6 g5 Ne4 d3 Nd6 fxg6 hxg6 Bg2 Nc6 Nc3 Nf5 Nf3 d6 Bd2 Bg7 h4 Qd7 Qe2 Ncd4 Qd1 Qe6+ Kf1 Qf7 Nxd4 Ng3+ Kg1 Bxd4 Qf3 Nxh1 Qxf7+ Kxf7 Bxh1

If this is done now. The knight will take the f2-pawn and black will do some discovery check.
============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Sandor Porkolab    (1476)
e4 e6 d4 d5 e5 b6

An interesting sideline (instead of the Mainline 3...c5) Black intention with b6 move is to change the light square bishops - by playing ...Ba6 later on - removing an active piece from the table.

Notable games:
GM Ulibin - GM Rustemov 2004 0-1
GM Ganguy - GM Berkes 2002 1/2-1/2
GM Ye Jiangchuan - GM Ivanchuk 2001 1/2-1/2
GM Khalifman - GM N. Short 2001 0-1
GM Baklan - GM Vaganian 1999 0-1
GM Shabalov - GM Seirawan 1999 0-1


============

Contributors : Sandor Porkolab


Sandor Porkolab    (1476)
e4 e6 d4 d5 e5 b6 c3 Qd7 Nf3 Ne7 Bd3 Ba6

6...Ba6 Here is the meaning of the earlier 4...b6 move - giving way to the c8 Bishop to a6 to go for the Bishop exchange. It is a good plan for black to remove the light square Bishops from the table - deactivating an active white bishop for a passive black bishop.

Options for white:

A, 7.0-0 castling

B, 7.Bxa6 go for the Bishop exchange

============

Contributors : Sandor Porkolab


Sandor Porkolab    (1476)
e4 e6 d4 d5 e5 b6 c3 Qd7 Nf3 Ne7 Bd3 Ba6 Bxa6 Nxa6

7.Nxa6 - the white square bishops removed from the table. Now black having a safe/defendable position.

============

Contributors : Sandor Porkolab


Sandor Porkolab    (1476)
e4 e6 d4 d5 e5 b6 c3 Qd7 Nf3 Ba6

5...Ba6 not the best move here. The f1 white Bishop not moved yet - white can capture directly the a6 Bishop and losing a potential tempo. Black move ...Ba6 should commence only after the f1 Bishop moved to e2 or d3.

============

Contributors : Sandor Porkolab


Normajean Yates    (1975)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Nc3 Nf6 Nxe5 Nxe5 d4 Nc6 d5 Bb4 dxc6 Nxe4 Qd4 Qe7 Qxg7 Nxc3+ Be3 Nd5+ c3 Rf8 cxb4 Nxe3 fxe3 Qxb4+


black is winning.

============

Contributors : Normajean Yates


Normajean Yates    (1975)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 dxc4 a4 Na6 e3 Bg4 Bxc4 e6 h3 Bh5 O-O Nb4 Qe2 Be7 Rd1 O-O g4 Bg6 e4 Nd7

Black is at least equal, and white's c1-Bishop is still hemmed in. All because of the weak 6.e3 in this line.
============

Contributors : Normajean Yates


Telmo Escobar    (1929)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Qxb2 Rb1 Qa3 f5 Nc6 fxe6 fxe6 Nxc6 bxc6 e5 dxe5 Bxf6 gxf6 Ne4 Qxa2 Rd1 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O Ra7 Rf3 Rd7 Bd3 f5 Qh6 Rf7 Rg3+ Kh8 Ng5 Rg7 Nxe6 Rf7 Rf1 e4 Bxe4 fxe4 Rxf7 Rd1+ Rf1 Rxf1+ Kxf1 Qb1+ Kf2 Qxc2+ Kf1 Qb1+ Ke2 Qb2+ Kf1 Bb4

Wins! Now it is Black -not White- who is looking for mate, so White will be forced to swap queens, but-

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (1929)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Qxb2 Rb1 Qa3 f5 Nc6 fxe6 fxe6 Nxc6 bxc6 e5 dxe5 Bxf6 gxf6 Ne4 Qxa2 Rd1 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O Ra7 Rf3 Rd7 Bd3 f5 Qh6 Rf7 Rg3+ Kh8 Ng5 Rg7 Nxe6 Rf7 Rf1 e4 Bxe4 fxe4 Rxf7 Rd1+ Rf1 Rxf1+ Kxf1 Qb1+ Kf2 Qxc2+ Kf1 Qb1+ Ke2 Qb2+ Kf1 Bb4 Qg7+ Qxg7 Nxg7 Bd6 Rg5 Bf4


And Black wins.
============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (1929)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Qxb2 Rb1 Qa3 f5 Nc6 fxe6 fxe6 Nxc6 bxc6 e5 dxe5 Bxf6 gxf6 Ne4 Qxa2 Rd1 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O Ra7 Rf3 Rd7 Bd3 f5 Qh6 Rf7 Rg3+ Kh8 Ng5 Rg7 Nxe6 Rf7 Rf1 e4 Be2 Bd6 Rg5 Qd5 Bh5 Bc5+ Nxc5 Qxc5+ Kh1 Qc4 Rg1 Rg7 Rxf5 Rd8 Re5 Qxc2 Qf6 Qd2


Black is prepared for 35.Re7 Qg5, but-
============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (1929)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Qxb2 Rb1 Qa3 f5 Nc6 fxe6 fxe6 Nxc6 bxc6 e5 dxe5 Bxf6 gxf6 Ne4 Qxa2 Rd1 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O Ra7 Rf3 Rd7 Bd3 f5 Qh6 Rf7 Rg3+ Kh8 Ng5 Rg7 Nxe6 Rf7 Rf1 e4 Be2 Bd6 Rg5 Qd5 Bh5 Bc5+ Nxc5 Qxc5+ Kh1 Qc4 Rg1 Rg7 Rxf5 Rd8 Re5 Qxc2 Qf6 Qd2 Bg6 hxg6 Re7 Qd4 Re8+


Now Black loses the queen
And is very lucky to save the skin

(a bit of poetry)
============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (1929)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Qxb2 Rb1 Qa3 f5 Nc6 fxe6 fxe6 Nxc6 bxc6 e5 dxe5 Bxf6 gxf6 Ne4 Qxa2 Rd1 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O Ra7 Rf3 Rd7 Bd3 f5 Qh6 Rf7 Rg3+ Kh8 Ng5 Rg7 Nxe6 Rf7 Rf1 e4 Be2 Bd6 Rg5 Qd5 Bh5 Bc5+ Nxc5 Qxc5+ Kh1 Qc4 Rg1 Rg7 Rxf5 Rd8 Re5 Qxc2 Qf6 Qd2 Bg6 hxg6 Re7 Qd4 Re8+ Rxe8 Qxd4 Kh7 Re1 Rge7 Re3

The likely result is a draw as Black king has no shelter.

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Telmo Escobar    (1929)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Qxb2 Rb1 Qa3 f5 Nc6 fxe6 fxe6 Nxc6 bxc6 e5 dxe5 Bxf6 gxf6 Ne4 Be7 Be2 h5 Rb3 Qa4 Nxf6+ Bxf6 c4 Bh4+ g3 Be7 O-O h4 Qd3 Qa5 Rd1 Qc5+ Kh1 e4 Qxe4 Rh6 gxh4 Bd7 Qf4 Rxh4 Qg3 Bg5 Rg1 Bf6 Rf3 Qe5 Qf2 O-O-O Rxf6 Rxh2+ Qxh2 Qxf6

And Black was better in Misius-Palevic, corr 1983.

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Sebastian Boehme    (2129)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 Be7 Qd2 O-O O-O-O Nbd7

A quite commonly tried move by black.

============

Contributors : Sebastian Boehme


Sebastian Boehme    (2129)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 Be7 Qd2 O-O O-O-O Nbd7 g4 b5 g5 Nh5

This is another very promising idea for black.

============

Contributors : Sebastian Boehme


Sebastian Boehme    (2129)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 Be7 Qd2 O-O O-O-O Nbd7 g4 b5 g5 b4 Ne2 Ne8 f4

Setting up the attack on the black kingside

============

Contributors : Sebastian Boehme


Normajean Yates    (1966)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 f3 Be7 Qd2 O-O O-O-O Nbd7 g4 b5 g5 b4 Ne2 Ne8 f4 a5 f5 a4

This is more common..; though if black is trying to win, (i.e. if a draw is not good enough) then maybe Bxb3 is preferable...

============

Contributors : Normajean Yates


Sophie Leclerc    (1525)
e4 f5 exf5 Nf6 Be2 e5


Therre is a answer to Bh5+.. Ke7.

while the check does not help black, It may not help black either.
============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Sophie Leclerc    (1525)
e4 f5 exf5 Nf6 Be2 e5 Bh5+ Ke7

Is black okay?

============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Sophie Leclerc    (1525)
e4 f5 exf5 Nf6 Be2 e5 fxe6 d5

Does black is lost here, he does not seem to have compensation.


============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Normajean Yates    (1967)
d4 f5 Nc3 d5 e4 dxe4

Transposes to a Blackmar-Gambit variation which is somewhat favourable to white.

============

Contributors : Normajean Yates


Sophie Leclerc    (1573)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 f3 h5

A new variation, Yugi variation, ( no, I don,t who got the idea), but black decide to delay castle and make this usefull move as this move gain even more control over the g4 square, it will be harder for white to continue with his pawn storm.

Black may want to play Bd7 and Nc6 before this move,

Can this be a good dragon variation. of course black may not castle at all.


right after making this strange, the play will normaly continue by white playing on kingside and black on the queen side. His king may go to the d7 square in order to find safety and connect his rook.
============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Sophie Leclerc    (1573)
f4 d6 Nf3 Nc6 c4 Nf6 Nc3

This opening can be call the phantom system, as it can not virtually die and if black is not carefull, white will be tired and can build faster then you can think a big pawn center.

No joke, the pawn center must not happen.


If white continue in a hyper-modern style, he will want to fianchetto his bishops.

From Yugi_inving.
============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Benjamin Block    (1660)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 Nd5 Nbd7 f3 Be7

?! Not recomdenderad but there is some nice analys by some good players+fast computers that even make white win but in the moment black fix a draw.
============

Contributors : Benjamin Block


Normajean Yates    (1967)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 a3

White sets a little trap. It is specially recommended against players who merely memorise 'book' lines: such players (as black) might play Qxb2? thinking it is the 'book' poisoned pawn variation; and Even if they do not, they are out of their 'book' :)

============

Contributors : Ray Downs, Normajean Yates


Normajean Yates    (1967)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 a3 Qxb2

Black carelessly takes the bait. Specially the 'book rote-learner' black.

============

Contributors : Ray Downs, Normajean Yates


Ray Downs    (1575)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 a3 Qxb2 Na4

Traps the black Queen. Black will have to trade his queen for white's rook now.

============

Contributors : Ray Downs


Normajean Yates    (1967)
e4 e5 f4 Qf6 Nf3 exf4 Bc4

Allows black to equalise.

============

Contributors : Normajean Yates


Sophie Leclerc    (1573)
e4 e5 f4 Qf6 Nf3 Qxf4 Nc3 Bb4 Bc4 Bxc3


Now the guardian of e4 is removed and black treat Qxe4 check, killing the attack
============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Sophie Leclerc    (1573)
e4 e5 f4 Qf6 Nf3 Qxf4 Nc3 Bb4 Bc4 Bxc3 O-O

the only possible monve, it give white compensation for the lost piece, Taking on c3 let black carrie out his treat. (Qxe4 check )

============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Sophie Leclerc    (1573)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 Be7 Bc4 Bh4+ Kf1

By far the best move, as the bishop is attacked, black has to spend another tiempo to developpe the king knight.

While with g3, white take enerous risk for nothing.

============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Sophie Leclerc    (1573)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 Be7 Bc4 Bh4+ g3 fxg3 Kf1 Qe7 Kg2 Qg5 Rf1 Qd8 Kg1 gxh2+ Kh1

The three pawns gambit, white take enermous risk and hide behind the black pawn.


White king would really exposed if he would take that pawn.


There is no real raison to play that.


I could not enter 0-0, sorry.

============

Contributors : Sophie Leclerc


Lauri Lahnasalo    (1600)
c4 e5 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Nc6 Nc2

This is good spot for white knight. One could look at the position as being sicilian defence reversed where "black" had played "Nf6" after "Nc3". Of course in reversed positiont white always has extra tempo.

============

Contributors : Lauri Lahnasalo


Lauri Lahnasalo    (1600)
c4 e5 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Nc6 Nc2 Nf6

Most blacks tries in theory have consisted of this move.

============

Contributors : Lauri Lahnasalo


Lauri Lahnasalo    (1600)
c4 e5 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Nc6 Nc2 d5 cxd5 Qxd5 Nc3

Otherwise black is in verge of having advantage in position.

============

Contributors : Lauri Lahnasalo


Lauri Lahnasalo    (1600)
c4 e5 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Nc6 Nc2 d5 cxd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qe5

Black queen has found secure spot where it cramps whole lot of whites game.

============

Contributors : Lauri Lahnasalo


Lauri Lahnasalo    (1600)
c4 e5 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Nc6 Nc2 d5 cxd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qe5 d3

Results in the same positions as after d4 as black has same response.

============

Contributors : Lauri Lahnasalo


Lauri Lahnasalo    (1600)
c4 e5 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Nc6 Nc2 d5 cxd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qe5 g3

Now white is in risk of becoming underdeveloped after black Nf6 or Bc5.

============

Contributors : Lauri Lahnasalo


Lauri Lahnasalo    (1600)
c4 e5 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6

Blacks best try.

============

Contributors : Lauri Lahnasalo


Alex Savu    (1350)
d4 e5 dxe5 Nc6 Nf3 Nge7

Zilbermints variation. Black aims to post the knight at g6 and recapture the pawn on e5. Not as bad as it might seem. White has tried a number of different moves at this point.

============

Contributors : Alex Savu


Luc-Olivier Leclerc    (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4

Curions opening, a curious gambit, in which white attack black's centre,

Black has no reason to accept it, but he can just take b4 and not on a3.

This^ opening should called the AudreySophie gambit. Or by my name, if your prefer to be not imaginative...
For now, black does not seem to have any way to bust it. And white trie for a big play everyside of the board.

============

Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc


Luc-Olivier Leclerc    (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 b6 g3 Bb7 bxc5 bxc5 Bg2 Nc6 O-O e6 Na3 a6 Qa4 Qa5

An unfair exchange., but best play for black.

============

Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc


Luc-Olivier Leclerc    (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 b6 g3 Bb7 bxc5 bxc5 Bg2 Nc6 O-O e6 Na3 a6 Qa4 Qa5 Qxa5 Nxa5 d3 Nf6 Bd2 Nc6 Ne5 Rc8 Rab1

Now white is fully developped and only need to destroy black's last queenside guard.

============

Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc


Luc-Olivier Leclerc    (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 b6 g3 Bb7 bxc5 bxc5 Bg2 Nc6 O-O e6 Na3 a6 Qa4 Qa5 Qxa5 Nxa5 d3 Nf6 Bd2 Nc6 Ne5 Rc8 Rab1 Ba8 Nxc6 Bxc6 Bxc6+ Rxc6 Rb8+ Kd7 Rfb1


there is little to do now. white is too active for any serious move, black lack any counter play.
============

Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc


Luc-Olivier Leclerc    (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 b6 g3 Bb7 bxc5 bxc5 Bg2 e6 Na3 Qf6 Rb1 Be4 d3 Bc6 Ne5

Black developpement is so slow, mate would be possible whitout the knight on b8 and the bishop by Qa4 and Qd7, hoverer, we need this move.
Black is gone by now, as, he need to do Bd7, giving up his rook, to live.
============

Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc


Luc-Olivier Leclerc    (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 b6 g3 Bb7 bxc5 bxc5 Bg2 e6 Na3 Qf6 Rb1 Be4 d3 Bc6 Ne5 Bxg2 Rxb8+

A reall good move, the rook cannot be taken, but it still is going bad for black.

============

Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc


Luc-Olivier Leclerc    (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 b6 g3 Bb7 bxc5 bxc5 Bg2 e6 Na3 Qf6 Rb1 Be4 d3 Bc6 Ne5 Bxg2 Rxb8+ Rxb8 Qa4+

End of my game, on Uchess, black resign, as he face mate,


The game AudreyxSophie-nadjdobar, end like that too.

============

Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc


Luc-Olivier Leclerc    (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 Nf6 bxc5

A logical move, now white will continue his plan of undermining the black's centre, who is now, only made of the d4-pawn.

============

Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc


Luc-Olivier Leclerc    (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 Nf6 bxc5 e6 Ba3 Nc6 g3 Qa5 Qb3 Bxc5

How else black keep going ?

============

Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc


Luc-Olivier Leclerc    (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 Nf6 bxc5 e6 Ba3 Nc6 g3 Qa5 Qb3 Bxc5 Qb5

A correct decision... when white lack in developpement, he exchange piece, but he make black, pay the price of those exchange. Whitout that, white would fall behind for the entire game.

============

Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc


Luc-Olivier Leclerc    (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 Nf6 bxc5 e6 Ba3 Nc6 g3 Qa5 Qb3 Bxc5 Qb5 Qxb5 cxb5 Nb4

slightly worse, is Bxa3.... but black won't pay for more exchange..... he already paid much.

============

Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc


Luc-Olivier Leclerc    (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 Nf6 bxc5 e6 Ba3 Nc6 g3 Qa5 Qb3 Bxc5 Qb5 Qxb5 cxb5 Nb4 Bxb4 Bxb4 Nxd4


taking a free pawn, but not developping. hoverer. black is not that great.
============

Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc


Luc-Olivier Leclerc    (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 Nf6 bxc5 e6 Ba3 Nc6 g3 Qa5 Qb3 Bxc5 Qb5 Qxb5 cxb5 Nb4 Bxb4 Bxb4 Nxd4 O-O Nc3 Rd8 e3 e5 fxe5 Ng4 Rc1 Nxe5 Be2 Bh3 Kf2 Rd6 Ne4 Rd7 Rc2 Re7 Rb1 Ba5 Rbc1 Rd8 Kg1 Bb6 Nc5 Rd6 Bf1 Bg4 Bg2 h5 h3 Bd7 Be4 Bxh3 Nxb7 Rxd4 exd4 Bxd4+ Kh2 Ng4+ Kxh3 Rxe4 Nd6 Re2 d3 Re3

this just bring black a pawn

============

Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc


Luc-Olivier Leclerc    (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 Nf6 bxc5 e6 Ba3 Nc6 g3 Qa5 Qb3 Bxc5 Qb5 Qxb5 cxb5 Nb4 Bxb4 Bxb4 Nxd4 O-O Nc3 Rd8 e3 e5 fxe5 Ng4 Rc1 Nxe5 Be2 Bh3 Kf2 Rd6 Ne4 Rd7 Rc2 Re7 Rb1 Ba5 Rbc1 Rd8 Kg1 Bb6 Nc5 Rd6 Bf1 Bg4 Bg2 h5 h3 Bd7 Be4 Bxh3 Nxb7 Rxd4 exd4 Bxd4+ Kh2 Ng4+ Kxh3 Rxe4 Nd6 Re2 d3 Re3 Nf5 Rxd3 Nxd4 Rxd4 Rc8+ Kh7 R8c7


Now the game consist of a lot of rook move, in the goal of exchanging the black rook, after white, black's game is gone.
============

Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc


Luc-Olivier Leclerc    (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 Nf6 bxc5 e6 Ba3 Nc6 g3 Qa5 Qb3 Bxc5 Qb5 Qxb5 cxb5 Nb4 Bxb4 Bxb4 Nxd4 O-O Nc3 Rd8 e3 e5 fxe5 Ng4 Rc1 Nxe5 Be2 Bh3 Kf2 Rd6 Ne4 Rd7 Rc2 Re7 Rb1 Ba5 Rbc1 Rd8 Kg1 Bb6 Nc5 Rd6 Bf1 Bg4 Bg2 h5 h3 Bd7 Be4 Bxh3 Nxb7 Rxd4 exd4 Bxd4+ Kh2 Ng4+ Kxh3 Rxe4 Nd6 Re2 d3 Re3 Nf5 Rxd3 Nxd4 Rxd4 Rc8+ Kh7 R8c7 Ra4 R1c2 f6 R7c4 Ra5 Rb4 Ra3 Rb3 Ra4 a3 g5 Rc6 Kg6 Kg2 h4 gxh4 gxh4 Ra6 Rxa6 bxa6 Ne5 Rb7 Nc6


And black resign, while making this move, as he tought, after, Rc7, the a-pawn was failing.

The end of a game. AudreyxSophie-Zsiracki on Redhotpawn
============

Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc


Luc-Olivier Leclerc    (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 e3

the normal continuation..


White plan include the exchange of the white square bishop for black's queen knight, b3 Bb2, d3, Ne5 + Nd2-f3-g5....

Altought, this is white's dream, it do not always happen.


lasker had the habit of playing Bd3 when black take long to develop the queen knight and let black scrap his pawn structure. In fact here, white became black and fight for equality.


============

Contributors : Gerard Gonet, Luc-Olivier Leclerc


Luc-Olivier Leclerc    (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 cxb4 a3 e6 Bb2 Nc6 axb4 Bxb4 e3


Now black has two alternative. but none grant him the safe little advantage.
============

Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc


Luc-Olivier Leclerc    (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 cxb4 a3 e6 Bb2 Nc6 axb4 Bxb4 e3 e5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Bxd4

Thye only good move, as the knight is pinned on the g7-pawn, moving it, cost a rook. so, basicly, black lost a pawn, but retain some compensation.


Maybe not all of them.

============

Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc


Luc-Olivier Leclerc    (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 cxb4 a3 e6 Bb2 Nc6 axb4 Bxb4 e3 Bc5 Qa4 Bd7 Qb3


the queen slide, at a4 and b3 is promising.

black has nearly no way to keep his extra, had bot d3 and dxe3 run into Bxg7. and Bd7 run into Qb5, and of crouse, e5 is just a bolt sacrifice, it fail since after Nxe5 Nxe5. White will go with a exd4 !!!, notice the poor fxe5 lose. to Qh4 +

============after Nxe5n

Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc


Mauro Petrolo    (2552)
e4 c5 c3 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nf3 Nf6

The main plan for black is to Nf6, e6 going for a short castle.

============

Contributors : Mauro Petrolo


Gregory Kohut    (1574)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 e6

This inaugurates the Taimanov/Paulsen lines of the Sicilian Defense. Black's main idea is to play Qc7 and a6 in some order (although the "pure" Taimanov, with ...a6 and Nge7, is also possible), controlling the dark squares with pieces and the light squares with pawns. The d5 and e6 points are generally less vulnerable than in many variations, leaving white with fewer obvious attacking possibilities. The game therefore can take on an oddly positional character for the Open Sicilian, with White seeking to prove dark squared weaknesses or obtain favorable piece exchanges.

============

Contributors : Graham Cridland


Gregory Kohut    (1592)
Nc3 d5 d4 Nf6 e4

The start of Blackmar Diemer Gambit.

============

Contributors : June Lorena


Gregory Kohut    (1592)
Nf3 c6 e4 d5 Nc3

Caro-Kann: Two knights variation

A move which may look weak, but one which has stood the test of time and has no hard refutation. Similar to the Mexican defense for black, this c3 knight will often be active, travelling to g3 and then attacking g7 later in many games. Black should resist the urge to force this manoeuvre and instead try to bolster the centre with a quick e6 and kingside development.

============

Contributors : Kieran Child


Gregory Kohut    (1592)
d4 Nf6 Nc3 d5 e4 dxe4 f3

The Blackmar Diemer Gambit (BDG).
With intention of rapid development and to open-up f-file.

If the gambitted pawn is accepted (it is usually does) there are two ways to recapture it.

Nxf3 - The Blackmar Diemer Gambit Setup
Qxf3 - The Ryder Gambit Setup

============

Contributors : June Lorena


Niklas Hallqvist    (1438)
d4 e6 Nf3 c5

Of the common moves in the preceding position, c5 is the one with the best statistics, at 42% (i.e. good for black), according to TWIC's tournament database (110406).

============

Contributors : Niklas Hallqvist


William Taylor    (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O b5 Bb3 Bb7 d3

The line which is currently causing Arkhangelsk practitioners some problems. Black can quickly run into trouble after Bc5, so he usually plays Be7 instead, leading to less active positions. d3 also strongpoints e4, making black's bishop on b7 look less than optimally placed. The d3 line is a good way of avoiding the sharper variations which arise after Re1 or c3.

============

Contributors : William Taylor


William Taylor    (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O b5 Bb3 Bb7 Re1 Bc5

By delaying d6 black is able to develop his dark-squared bishop to this more active square, and his two bishops now exert a lot of pressure on the centre and towards the white kingside.

============

Contributors : William Taylor


William Taylor    (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O b5 Bb3 Bb7 Re1 Bc5 c3

Simply planning to expand in the centre with d4, which will come with a tempo because the black bishop on c5 will be attacked.

============

Contributors : William Taylor


William Taylor    (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O b5 Bb3 Bb7 Re1 Bc5 c3 d6 d4

Continuing with his plan. White now has a nice pawn centre, but the black bishops exert plenty of pressure on it.

============

Contributors : William Taylor


William Taylor    (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O b5 Bb3 Bb7 Re1 Bc5 c3 d6 d4 Bb6 Bg5

One of the main moves, the other being Be3. This pin can be extremely annoying for black, but it seems like he has found a strong antidote in this instance.

============

Contributors : William Taylor


William Taylor    (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O b5 Bb3 Bb7 Re1 Bc5 c3 d6 d4 Bb6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5

Once this idea was found, the Bg5 line decreased in popularity. The point is that a sacrifice on g5 has little value because the black king has not yet castled. Black gets out of the pin and is ready to castle afterwards.

============

Contributors : William Taylor


William Taylor    (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O b5 Bb3 Bb7 Re1 Bc5 c3 d6 d4 Bb6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 O-O

Although black's kingside pawn structure looks a little weakened, practice has shown that black gets excellent play in this position. His two bishops look strong, he has a solid foothold in the centre, and he is ready to commence active operations on the kingside with moves like Nh5.

============

Contributors : William Taylor


William Taylor    (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O b5 Bb3 Bb7 c3

If there is a way to refute the Arkhangelsk Variation by force, it will probably start with c3. The move can lead to wild complications, but black currently seems to be holding his own in them. The point is to accelerate the plan of d4 without bothering to defend e4, arguing that capturing on e4 will be dangerous for black as his king is still in the centre.
============

Contributors : William Taylor


Weglicki Slawomir    (2130)
e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d3

============

Contributors : Antonio Palacios, Weglicki [Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2019.10.25"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Węglicki Sławomir"]
[Black "Węglicki Sławomir"]
[Result "*"]
[TimeControl "40/5400+30"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 *




Riani Kiiari    (1800)
e4 h5 d4

usually blacks plan is Rh6?? and semmetry on the other side viz: ...a6 (Nf3) Ra6?? taking the rooks for bishops is not bad with the centeral contol already established by the pawns.

============

Contributors : Riani Kiiari


Kirill Bachorov    (1800)
e4 e6 d4 d5 exd5 Qxd5

============

Contributors : If white doesn't know what he is doing this can turn out to be very good for black. John Medearis, Kirill Bachorov


Telmo Escobar    (1847)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2 Nf6 e5 Nfd7 c3 c5 Bd3 Nc6 Ne2 cxd4 cxd4 f6 exf6 Qxf6 O-O e5

Black inferior development means this move is too risky

============

Contributors : Telmo Escobar


Ilmars Cirulis    (2168)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Bc4 fxe4 Nxe5 d5 Qh5+ g6 Nxg6 hxg6 Qxh8 Kf7 Qd4 Nf6 Be2 Nc6 Qe3 d4 Qg5 d3 cxd3 exd3 Bd1 Nd4

Black has good chances of drawing. 3.Bc4, probably, isn't going to work against Latvian gambit.

============

Contributors : Ilmars Cirulis


Paul Brand Lyard    (1777)
c4 c5 Nc3 d6 Nf3 Bd7 d4 a6 dxc5 Nc6

============

Contributors : Piotr Wiaderek, Paul Brand Lyard

Play knight on c6 is it really the best move to play here,
or to capture the white pawn c5 with the black pawn d6 now is the better and stongest attack,
to get the control of cells b4 and d4, ans qu'on the advantage opening position?


Ilmars Cirulis    (2241)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Bc4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 d4 Bb4 Nge2 f3 gxf3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 O-O Nxc3 bxc3 Bd6

Black has better pawn structure (two pawn islands versus four pawn islands). White will suffer, even if they reach a draw.

============

Contributors : Ilmars Cirulis


Alexis Marcel    (1395)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 e3 Nf6 b3 Nc6 Bb5

Removing the knight allows you to keep control over the black squares d4 and e5

============

Contributors : Alexis Marcel






FICGS : black ,   Wikipedia : black ,   Dmoz : black ,   Google : black ,   Yahoo : black




Fischer sacrificed virtually everything most of us weakies (to use his term) value, respect, and cherish, for the sake of an artful, often beautiful board game, for the ambivalent privilege of being its greatest master. (Paul Kollar)

If one piece is badly posted, the whole game is bad. (Tarrasch)

When I asked Fischer why he had not played a certain move in our game, he replied: 'Well, you laughed when I wrote it down !' (Mikhail Tal)




Back to FICGS , Wikichess




[Chess forum] [Rating lists] [Countries] [Chess openings] [Legal informations] [Contact]
[Social network] [Hot news] [Discussions] [Seo forums] [Meet people] [Directory]