f3, g3 or f6, g6 King Dance

5 views
Skip to first unread message

Wade Thames

unread,
Mar 2, 1999, 3:00:00 AM3/2/99
to
There someone that signs in as a guest on ICC that plays with white f3 and
g3 (f6 and g6 with black) and moves his king back forth until you try to
attack! I found it very hard to beat in a blitz game. I won only a few games
and lost the other because a lack of time. So what do you think I did: I
started playing myself! Well most players resigned after about 7 or 8
moves, a few resigned after a lost of material and a couple players resigned
after the first move.

I know it unsound but what is up with this opening, is this a new fad!

--
Wade Thames
wth...@pacificnet.net
wth...@msn.com
wade_...@hotmail.com

Wade Thames

unread,
Mar 2, 1999, 3:00:00 AM3/2/99
to
Your are right! I also was wondering what blitz is doing to my play in
general! My calculations have gotten sloppy when playing blitz!


CodyP1701E

unread,
Mar 3, 1999, 3:00:00 AM3/3/99
to
Best response, unless you are very good at blitz is to dance your knight and
claim a draw be repetition of position. Fraustrates the pazter playing the
king move and forces him to do something else, to to take the draw.

i45.5yul4...@chi.com

unread,
Mar 3, 1999, 3:00:00 AM3/3/99
to
On Tue, 2 Mar 1999 15:26:48 -0800, "Wade Thames"
<wth...@pacificnet.net> wrote:

>There someone that signs in as a guest on ICC that plays with white f3 and
>g3 (f6 and g6 with black) and moves his king back forth until you try to
>attack! I found it very hard to beat in a blitz game. I won only a few games
>and lost the other because a lack of time. So what do you think I did: I
>started playing myself! Well most players resigned after about 7 or 8
>moves, a few resigned after a lost of material and a couple players resigned
>after the first move.
>
>I know it unsound but what is up with this opening, is this a new fad!

No, some blokes have been playing it for yonks on ICC. Beware. They're
usually strong players. Some play all their pawns up on rank for their
first eight moves. Then, they crush you. It happens to me a lot and
I'm over 2000 (Bullet) on ICC.

It seems to me the idea is that they get you thinking too hard and
taking too long over how to "exploit" their patently inferior moves.
You either lose on time, or, they suddenly "start playing", catching
you unawares.

Rahvinsong

unread,
Mar 3, 1999, 3:00:00 AM3/3/99
to

I have observed a GM playing like this on ICC against the computers,
demonstrating how a computer fails to "think" properly. As far as an opening
system for white or black, I believe it is rather unsound, no matter who you
are playing. In a blitz game against a human it might indeed be difficult to
win, but that is not chess. It is a joke. I don't face it, because I don't
play much blitz, but in an OTB game I feel I am strong enough to beat anyone
who tries this crap, and welcome anyone to try.

To all you beginners out there...do not follow this method of play!!! It is
irresponsible, and forms bad playing habits. Blitz chess is supposed to help
you "get a feel" for the openings you play, and to explore novelties in the
openings. (It can be alot of fun, too!) If you are successful with this joke
opening in blitz play, will you play it in an OTB tournament?? If you do, then
chances are you will lose your games horribly, even to players rated much lower
than you. The only acceptable use of this system is against computers, who
fail miserably against it. And this should only be used to demonstrate the
very real superority of human players over computers.

Sorry, didn't want to start a flame war, but I just feel that anyone that takes
up this "King Dance" because it works in blitz does not care too much about
the game, and cares alot more about meaningless online ratings points.

David Carter
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Cavern/6551/index.html


David Carter

helmet

unread,
Mar 3, 1999, 3:00:00 AM3/3/99
to

>Sorry, didn't want to start a flame war, but I just feel that anyone that takes
>up this "King Dance" because it works in blitz does not care too much about
>the game, and cares alot more about meaningless online ratings points.

>David Carter
>http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Cavern/6551/index.html


>David Carter

Ok i will bite.!
The opening is only a small part of a chess game.
Probably the least important of the three main phases of play.
Playing this opening online will not ruin your over the board play.
Sure you will probably end up in an inferior possition (maybe)
but you will still have the middle and end game to fight for.
It can be more harmful to learn a" proper opening"
off by heart and then use your book knowledge to carry you
through the game.
I remember an over the board game i played against
a canadian candidate master several years ago.
I played a3, h3 and Ra2. He began confidently , shaking his head
and tutting at my moves with contempt. Forty moves later he had
been totally outplayed.
He ended up Storming off saying
"im not used to stupid openings
you are garbage"
Young players not only need to learn how to play the sicilian
etc they need to learn to be creative and be able to adapt
to unusual positions etc
helmet


Ron Moskovitz

unread,
Mar 3, 1999, 3:00:00 AM3/3/99
to
Remember:

Really bad moves are refuted by general principles.

Rather than try to refute your opponent's play by launching an attack
quickly, simply develop your pieces to good squares, and then open the
position.

A lot of players get into trouble because they see a bad move and
decide that it must punished instantly. This often plays into their
opponent's hands.

Play slower games so that time isn't the dominant factor (introduce
a small increment, for example.) Playing someone like this is good practice:
learning to gain an advantage against inferior play is much more important
than learning the latest dragon theory.

If you can't launch an attack in the amount of time you have, you're
playing much too fast. As you get better, you'll be able to do more with
less time, but for now you're just torturing yuourself by playing
faster than you can think. Instead of 3 0, play 5 3. Instead of 2 12,
play 5 12. If that's still too fast for you, slow it down some more.
You're not learning anything if you're only worrying about the clock.

-Ron

fri...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Mar 3, 1999, 3:00:00 AM3/3/99
to
When I'm faced with some kind of opening craziness as this, just IGNORE IT!!
Build a center, get the pieces out, and the opponent's lag in doing the same
will lose!!!!! (eventually)

The way to refute it is to beat it!

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own

Philip Delaquess

unread,
Mar 3, 1999, 3:00:00 AM3/3/99
to
> >>There someone that signs in as a guest on ICC that plays with white f3 and
> >>g3 (f6 and g6 with black) and moves his king back forth until you try to
> >>attack!

That does get you out of your book in a hurry, doesn't it? A few weeks ago, I
played a game against my wife, who hasn't played in years and has no training at
all. She played 1.a4. My first thought was "Jeezus, now what? None of my books tell
you how to defend against THAT."

Philip.

mbur...@montana.com

unread,
Mar 3, 1999, 3:00:00 AM3/3/99
to

>"Wade Thames" <wth...@pacificnet.net> wrote:
>There someone that signs in as a guest on ICC that plays with white f3
>and g3 (f6 and g6 with black) and moves his king back forth until you try to

>attack! I found it very hard to beat in a blitz game. I won only a few
>games and lost the other because a lack of time. So what do you think I
>did: I started playing myself! Well most players resigned after about 7
>or 8 moves, a few resigned after a lost of material and a couple players >resigned after the first move.

You must be playing at the IGP level. 1.e4 g6 2.d4 f6 3.h4 is hard to
meet. I call this the Jones defense because Leo Jones, the 1st African
American to reach the 2000 plateau, played it. Leo, now dead, was born
around 1920 and was a Bay Area chess fixture.

Max Burkett

anti...@spam.demon.co.uk

unread,
Mar 3, 1999, 3:00:00 AM3/3/99
to rec.games.chess.misc
In article <acummin.16...@es.co.nz>, Helmet wrote:

> I played a3, h3 and Ra2. He began confidently , shaking his head
> and tutting at my moves with contempt. Forty moves later he had
> been totally outplayed.

Is this the "Global Opening" suggested by Basman?


--
Adios Amigo

Carl Tillotson

Lancashire Chess Association
homepage: http://www.lancashirechess.demon.co.uk/

Virtual Access 4.50 build 266 (32-bit)
Using Win98

Rahvinsong

unread,
Mar 3, 1999, 3:00:00 AM3/3/99
to
Absolutely Correct!! Mabye this is why I play blitz badly, because I am not
advanced enough to use the time allotted to me correctly. I will think on
this.

David Carter
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Cavern/6551/frames.html


Wade Thames

unread,
Mar 3, 1999, 3:00:00 AM3/3/99
to
Never heard of Leo Jones but this is good info! Well a least I know what it
is called "The Jones Defense"! Do you have any of his games that you can
share? Was he a blitz player?

Thanks!

mbur...@montana.com wrote in message <7bk17m$iln$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...

Wade Thames

unread,
Mar 3, 1999, 3:00:00 AM3/3/99
to
Usually I go all out to attack it and sometimes (I believe justifiably) I
violate some principles just to knock them out quickly! I remember when I
was novice it took me awhile figure out the "Hedge Hog" but then later I
figured out!

I've seen this also:

1.g3 h5?!


Philip Delaquess wrote in message <36DD737C...@gcg.com>...


>> >>There someone that signs in as a guest on ICC that plays with white f3
and
>> >>g3 (f6 and g6 with black) and moves his king back forth until you try
to
>> >>attack!
>

Rahvinsong

unread,
Mar 4, 1999, 3:00:00 AM3/4/99
to
> The opening is only a small part of a chess game.
> Probably the least important of the three main phases of play.
>

True, but in serious chess competition, the player that gets an opening
advantage often will win the game!! Opening theory is the only phase of the
three that is "evolving"!! It needs to be studied. The other phases of the
game are equally important, but they only need to be checked back with once in
a while to stay fresh. Once you know how to win with an extra pawn in a K+P
endgame, you know it. It will not change. This goes the same with middlegame
mating and attacking patterns, themes, and so forth.

> Playing this opening online will not ruin your over the board play.

Surely, It cannot help it!?


> Sure you will probably end up in an inferior possition (maybe)
> but you will still have the middle and end game to fight for.

Who likes to play a game from an inferior position?

> It can be more harmful to learn a" proper opening"
> off by heart and then use your book knowledge to carry you
>through the game.

This is true. It is best to know _why_ you are playing the moves, not just
going over the "book".


> I played a3, h3 and Ra2. He began confidently , shaking his head
>and tutting at my moves with contempt. Forty moves later he had
>been totally outplayed.

> He ended up Storming off saying
> "im not used to stupid openings
> you are garbage"
> Young players not only need to learn how to play the sicilian
>etc they need to learn to be creative and be able to adapt
>to unusual positions etc
> helmet

True, it is a good _training exercise_ for youngsters, but not recommended for
them to take up. It is a bad habit, and should be taught as bad chess.

To each their own, though. I doubt that anybody that plays this on a regular
basis will get that far in the chessic world.

David Carter
Hoosier Chess
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Cavern/6551/frames.html

Rahvinsong

unread,
Mar 4, 1999, 3:00:00 AM3/4/99
to
>> >>There someone that signs in as a guest on ICC that plays with white f3
>and
>> >>g3 (f6 and g6 with black) and moves his king back forth until you try to
>> >>attack!
>
>That does get you out of your book in a hurry, doesn't it? A few weeks ago, I
>played a game against my wife, who hasn't played in years and has no training
>at
>all. She played 1.a4. My first thought was "Jeezus, now what? None of my
>books tell
>you how to defend against THAT."
>
>Philip.
>
>

Take the rook with a bishop when it comes out.

Ron Moskovitz

unread,
Mar 4, 1999, 3:00:00 AM3/4/99
to
In article <19990303220930...@ng38.aol.com>,

Rahvinsong <rahvi...@aol.com> wrote:
>> The opening is only a small part of a chess game.
>> Probably the least important of the three main phases of play.
>>
>
>True, but in serious chess competition, the player that gets an opening
>advantage often will win the game!!


I have to pretty strongly disagree, unless by "serious competition"
you mean master-strength and above.

In classville, I've noticed very little connection between geting
an opening advantage and victory.


helmet

unread,
Mar 4, 1999, 3:00:00 AM3/4/99
to

>>True, but in serious chess competition, the player that gets an opening
>>advantage often will win the game!!


> I have to pretty strongly disagree, unless by "serious competition"
>you mean master-strength and above.

> In classville, I've noticed very little connection between geting
>an opening advantage and victory.

ron m

Have to agree with ron here (even though it hurts)
Most games between players below master level are decided
by either one big blunder or lots of poor moves.
We all think we play a reasonable game, but in reality
our games are full of mistakes, this is why kasparov would
crush any non master.
Below master level it is far more important to use
an opening which leads to a middle game position which
you understand. It dosent really matter if in theory you are
slightly worse, whats important is that you understand the
resulting middle game.
Below master level you can go a long way by just
playing a solid game, concentrating on the basics and waiting
for your opponents mistakes.
helmet

flum

unread,
Mar 4, 1999, 3:00:00 AM3/4/99
to
>> Below master level you can go a long way by just playing a solid game,
concentrating on the basics and waiting for your opponents mistakes.

How dull. No wonder so many of us ultimately quit the game.


zene...@wwa.com

unread,
Mar 4, 1999, 3:00:00 AM3/4/99
to
On Wed, 3 Mar 1999, Wade Thames wrote:

> I've seen this also:
>
> 1.g3 h5?!

Oh but it gets much more subtle than this. Some openings books recommend
that 1.a3 is best answered by 1...g6. So my brother once had the idea to
provoke the above attack with 1.a3 g6 2.h4. :-)


mrmip

unread,
Mar 4, 1999, 3:00:00 AM3/4/99
to

>
>You must be playing at the IGP level. 1.e4 g6 2.d4 f6 3.h4 is hard to
>meet. I call this the Jones defense because Leo Jones, the 1st African
>American to reach the 2000 plateau, played it. Leo, now dead, was born
>around 1920 and was a Bay Area chess fixture.
>


Interesting bit of info , thanks Max.

Pardon my ignorance , but who is highest rated African American today ? Is
it Maurice Ashley ? What about historically the highest rated ? Any GM愀 ?

just curious
mr.mip

Rahvinsong

unread,
Mar 4, 1999, 3:00:00 AM3/4/99
to
> In classville, I've noticed very little connection between geting
>an opening advantage and victory.
>

I am also in "class-ville", and have noticed that I am beating people two and
three hundred points higher than me since I have begun a diligent program of
opening study. I connect sound opening play as "serious" mostly as the serious
desire to raise the level of one's game.

Rahvinsong

unread,
Mar 4, 1999, 3:00:00 AM3/4/99
to
Glad to see that you agree with me, helmet. I also stressed the knowledge of
_why_ the opening you choose is played. Also, by way of my previous post, if
you are below master level, do you not study the openings for this reason??
(to acheive master level) Not everyone aspires to be a master, but then they
are not "serious" chessplayers, but more of a casual sort. Do you see my
point.

Back to the thread...

What type of middlegame does one feel comfortable after pushing the g and f
pawns and dancing the king around?

Rahvinsong

unread,
Mar 4, 1999, 3:00:00 AM3/4/99
to
Sad but true, chess is a wonderful game. You don't _have_ to be a serious
player, in fact the bulk of us are not.

gnohm...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Mar 4, 1999, 3:00:00 AM3/4/99
to
In article <acummin.16...@es.co.nz>,

acu...@es.co.nz (helmet) wrote:
>
> >>True, but in serious chess competition, the player that gets an opening
> >>advantage often will win the game!!
>
> > I have to pretty strongly disagree, unless by "serious competition"
> >you mean master-strength and above.
>
> > In classville, I've noticed very little connection between geting
> >an opening advantage and victory.
> ron m
>
> Have to agree with ron here (even though it hurts)
> Most games between players below master level are decided
> by either one big blunder or lots of poor moves.
> We all think we play a reasonable game, but in reality
> our games are full of mistakes, this is why kasparov would
> crush any non master.

Trust me, at the 2300-2400 level, our games are still full of mistakes.

(We do like to think that our mistakes are of a higher quality :-)

Chess is beyond human ability to play perfectly. That's the whole point.

Ron Moskovitz

unread,
Mar 4, 1999, 3:00:00 AM3/4/99
to
In article <19990304072432...@ng03.aol.com>,
Rahvinsong <rahvi...@aol.com> wrote:

>I am also in "class-ville", and have noticed that I am beating people two and
>three hundred points higher than me since I have begun a diligent program of
>opening study. I connect sound opening play as "serious" mostly as the serious
>desire to raise the level of one's game.

Is this connected with a greater dilligence in studying all phases of your
game? How are you going about studying openings?

Studying anything dilligently is going to improve you game. It's a question
of what the returns will be.

(Are you David J Carter of Indiana? If so, clearly you're not beating
people 2-300 points higher than you all the time, because your rating
has only gone up 60-odd points in the last 14 months. If this is a recent
phenominon, I strongly caution you against reading too much into a short-term
win streak--that way lies madness, because win streaks, even against
strong players, happen, and they don't always mean what we want them to
mean.)

-Ron

anti...@spam.demon.co.uk

unread,
Mar 4, 1999, 3:00:00 AM3/4/99
to rec.games.chess.misc
In article <acummin.16...@es.co.nz>, Helmet wrote:

> 1. a3 g6 2.b4 Bg7 3.Ra2 followed by Bb2

This is a line similar to one advocated by Michael Basman, and can be
quite effective for White *provided* he/she has spent time on the
nuances of the position.

I am sure Helmet that the first time you used this it wasn't all sweet
and rosy?

Or is this one of your pet "blitz" lines, never used OTB in tournament
play?

Some of Basman's play - not exactly the same order (but the concept of
mirror-image shouldn't be lost here). You will see that some of his
games did net him a few "brownie points" - the draw against Oll was one

Basman,M (2385) - Singh,S (2225) [A00]
London Lloyds, 1989

1.g4 d5 2.h3 e5 3.Bg2 c6 4.d4 e4 5.c4 Bd6 6.Nc3 Ne7 7.Qb3 0-0 8.Bd2 Na6
9.Rc1 Bb4 10.Nxe4 dxe4 11.Bxb4 c5 12.Bxc5 Nxc5 13.dxc5 f5 14.gxf5 Bxf5
15.h4 Ng6 16.Qc3 Nf4 17.Bf1 Qc7 18.h5 Rad8 19.h6 Nd3+ 20.exd3 exd3
21.Nf3 Rde8+ 22.Kd1 Bg4 23.Bxd3 Rxf3 24.Kc2 Bf5 25.Rcd1 Rd8 26.Rhg1 g6
27.Bxf5 Rxc3+ 28.bxc3 Rxd1 29.Be6+ Kf8 30.Rxd1 Qxc5 31.Rd4 Qe5 32.Bg4
Qg5 33.f3 Qxh6 34.Rd8+ Ke7 35.Rd7+ Kf6 36.Rxb7 Qh2+ 37.Kb3 h5 38.Bd7
Qf2 39.Rb5 Qxf3 40.Kb4 Qd1 41.Rd5 Qb1+ 42.Kc5 0-1

Basman,M (2385) - Summerscale,A (2320) [A00]
London Lloyds, 1989

1.g4 d5 2.h3 e5 3.Bg2 Nc6 4.c4 dxc4 5.Bxc6+ bxc6 6.Nf3 h5 7.gxh5 e4
8.Ne5 Qd5 9.Qa4 e3 10.f3 Ne7 11.Nxc4 exd2+ 12.Bxd2 Be6 13.Nba3 Nc8
14.e4 Qd7 15.Ne5 Qd6 16.Rc1 Nb6 17.Qxc6+ Qxc6 18.Nxc6 Rxh5 19.Nd4 Bd7
20.Rxc7 Bxa3 21.bxa3 Rxh3 22.Rxh3 Bxh3 23.Nb5 Bd7 24.Nd6+ Kd8 25.Rc1
Be6 26.Bf4 Kd7 27.Nb5 Bc4 28.a4 Rh8 29.Kf2 a6 30.Nd6 Bxa2 31.a5 Nc8
32.Nf5 g6 33.Rc7+ Kd8 34.Nd4 Be6 35.Rc6 Rh5 36.Rxa6 Bc4 37.Rc6 Bd3
38.a6 Ra5 39.Bc7+ 1-0


Basman,M (2365) - Emms,J (2455) [A00]
BCF-ch (6), 1992

1.h3 d5 2.a3 e5 3.c4 c6 4.cxd5 cxd5 5.d3 Bd6 6.g4 Ne7 7.Bg2 Nbc6 8.Nc3
Bc7 9.Nf3 0-0 10.Bd2 Kh8 11.Rc1 a6 12.Nh4 Bb6 13.Nf5 Be6 14.e4? dxe4
15.dxe4 Nd4µ 16.Be3 Bb3 17.Qd2 g6 18.Ng3 Qd6 19.Nge2 Rfd8 20.Nxd4 exd4
21.Bf4 Qe6 22.Ne2 Nc6 23.0-0 Ne5 24.Bg3 d3 25.Nf4 Qf6 26.Qc3 d2
27.Nxg6+ Qxg6 28.Bxe5+ Kg8 29.Qxb3 dxc1Q 30.Rxc1 Rd2 31.Bg3 Rad8 32.Rc3
Qe6 33.Qxe6 fxe6 34.Rb3 Bd4 35.Rxb7 Rf8 36.e5 Bxf2+ 37.Bxf2 Rfxf2
38.Be4 Rxb2 39.Bxh7+ Kh8 40.Rxb2 Rxb2 41.Bd3 a5 42.a4 Kg7 43.Bc4 Rb4
44.Bb5 Kg6 45.Kf2 Kg5 46.Ke3 Rb3+ 47.Kd4 Rxh3 48.Kc5 Kxg4 49.Kb6 Kf4
50.Kxa5 Kxe5 51.Kb6 Kd6 52.a5 Rh8!-+ 53.Bc6 Rc8 54.Bb7 Rc2 55.a6 Rb2+
56.Ka5 Kc5 57.Ka4 Kb6 58.Ka3 Rb5 59.Ka4 e5 60.Ka3 Rb1 61.Ka2 Rb4 62.Ka3
Rd4 63.Kb3 e4 64.Kc3 e3 65.Bf3 Rd2 66.Bb7 Rd8 0-1

Basman,M (2350) - Budnikov,A (2535) [A00]
London Lloyds (2), 1993

1.h3 d5 2.a3 e5 3.c4 d4 4.d3 a5 5.g4 Nc6 6.Nf3 h6 7.Nbd2 Nf6 8.Bg2 Be7
9.g5 hxg5 10.Nxg5 Nh5 11.Ndf3 f6 12.Ne4 g5 13.Qc2 Rg8 14.e3 dxe3
15.Bxe3 Ng7 16.d4 exd4 17.0-0-0 Nf5 18.Ng3 Qd7 19.Rhe1 Nxe3 20.fxe3 d3
21.Rxd3 Qe6 22.Rd5 Bd7 23.Nf5 0-0-0 24.Qb3 Qe4 25.Ne5 Qxf5 26.Nxc6 Bxc6
27.Rxf5 Bxg2 28.e4 g4 29.hxg4 Rxg4 30.Rxa5 b6 31.c5 Kb7 32.c6+ Kb8
33.Ra8+ 1-0

Basman,M (2375) - Oll,L (2615) [A00]
London Lloyds (1), 1994

1.h3 e5 2.a3 d5 3.d3 c5 4.g4 Nc6 5.Bg2 Nge7 6.Nc3 d4 7.Ne4 Ng6 8.Nf3
Be7 9.g5 f5 10.gxf6 gxf6 11.h4 Rg8 12.c4 Be6 13.Qa4 Qa5+ 14.Qxa5 Nxa5
15.Rb1 Nb3 16.Bh6 Nh8 17.Bf1 Nf7 18.Bc1 Rb8 19.Nfd2 Nxc1 20.Rxc1 b5
21.cxb5 Rxb5 22.b3 f5 23.Bh3 Rg6 24.h5 Rh6 25.Ng3 Nd6 26.Bg2 Kf8 27.e3
dxe3 28.fxe3 Bg5 29.Ke2 Bxb3 30.Nxb3 Rxb3 31.Rxc5 f4 32.exf4 Rb2+
33.Kf3 Bxf4 34.Bh3 Rb3 35.Rd5 Rxa3 36.Nf5 Nxf5 37.Bxf5 Bg5 38.Rg1 Be7
39.Rb1 Rxh5 40.Be4 Ra6 41.Rb8+ Kf7 42.Rb7 Rf6+ 43.Ke3 Rh3+ 44.Kd2 Rh2+
45.Ke3 Rh3+ 46.Kd2 Rh2+ 47.Ke3 ½-½

helmet

unread,
Mar 5, 1999, 3:00:00 AM3/5/99
to

>Oh but it gets much more subtle than this. Some openings books recommend
>that 1.a3 is best answered by 1...g6. So my brother once had the idea to
>provoke the above attack with 1.a3 g6 2.h4. :-)

Many of my games begin


1. a3 g6 2.b4 Bg7 3.Ra2 followed by Bb2

May not be theoretically fantastic but allows
white to play on his territory
helmet

Rahvinsong

unread,
Mar 5, 1999, 3:00:00 AM3/5/99
to
I don't get the time to play in many tournaments, but have a few friends in the
16-1800 range, and we split the games pretty evenly, and have been doing so for
the past six months or so.

What I'm trying to say, is that I did not have a fully rounded game until i had
studied the openings. I knew enough about the endgame, and had decent tactical
play, but was coming out of the opening with much worse positions!!

The reason I posted to this thread is to discourage the bad habit of playing
unsound openings. ... even in blitz.

David Carter

B76215

unread,
Mar 6, 1999, 3:00:00 AM3/6/99
to
>A low-rated though kind-hearted and intelligent friend of mine once said
>something to the effect, 'I hate to say it, but it appears nobody below
>2700 knows how to play chess.'
>

Kasparov, Kramnik and Anand would agree with him.

But I think Viktor would be really mad, he made it to 2695! ;-)

Regards.


Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages