|
#51
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
Stick a finger up your nose, and pick a winner. Here you know how to play. What do you think White should do in this game? ![]() |
#52
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
erm sacrifice the bishop? ![]()
__________________
The World is burning... |
#53
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
![]() Ah that's not even trying, at least not until you name exactly how best to sacrifice the bishop? Which would be better to sacrifice? "surrender or destruction of something prized or desirable for the sake of something considered as having a higher or more pressing claim" So in addition, what would you gain from that? If it's not a sacrifice, maybe there is something else? |
#54
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Wait....
Quote:
You were doing alright before. You used to copy the string as it exactly was, like "your mom" condition here, ":O", and "yer". Now it seems you have fixed the meaning to call by the word itself. So why don't you merge those two findings together somehow and pound them into your puny little brain? ![]() zilmar needs the original spelling to distort properly. |
#55
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
Quote:
![]() As long as it's not a sure implication of the end of the universe I'd say Hi Ho, Hi Hoe, it's off to work we go!
__________________
The World is burning... Last edited by Mdkcheatz; 14th May 2009 at 11:36 AM. Reason: Bashing the Bishop :O |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Quite LOL, how this topic when offtopic :P
__________________
Emulation is my hobby. |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
lol it got offtopic when rswedlow started talkling bbout chess
|
#58
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
An axe in the head keeps the local psychologist ahead. ![]() 1.Nc3 is evil...chess opening books hate it. 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 d4 3.Nb1 e5 4.Nf3 Bd6 5.Bc4 Nf6 6.O-O O-O 7.c3 dxc3 8.dxc3 Nxe4 9.Qe2 Nf6 10.Nxe5 Nbd7 11.Nf3 Re8 12.Qc2 Nb6 13.Bd3 h6 14.Nbd2 Be6 15.Ne4 = {8.Nxc3 h6 =} 1.Nc3 c5 2.g3 d5 3.Bg2 Nf6 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.O-O e5 6.Nb1 = 1.Nc3 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 = {2.a3 =} 1.Nc3 e6 2.b3 d5 3.Bb2 Nf6 4.Nf3 = 1.Nc3 f5 2.e4 fxe4 3.d3 exd3 4.Bxd3 Nf6 5.Bg5 e6 6.Ne4 Be7 = 1.Nc3 Nc6 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e4 e5 = {4.d4 Bb4 -+, 4.Bb5 Nd4 =, 4.Be2 Bb4 5.O-O Nxe4 6.Nxe5 =} 1.Nc3 Nf6 2.e4 d5 3.exd5 Nxd5 4.Bc4 Nb6 5.Bb3 Nc6 6.Nf3 Bf5 7.O-O = |
#59
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
The French Defense is to the King's pawn opening the responsive system surging most with counterplay.
The more popular Sicilian Defense is derived from several concepts. 1.e4 c5 { 2.c3 d5 3.e5 d4 2.d3 d6 3.Nf3 Nf6 2.d4 cxd4 3.Nf3 a6 4.Nxd4 e5 5.Nf3 Nf6 2.e5 d5 3.c3 Bf5 2.f4 d6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 Nbd7 5.Be2 g6 6.O-O Bg7 7.d3 O-O } Other concepts include the flexibility of moving the pawn of the Queen's bishop to its fourth square, as this does nothing to develop the King's side while it is a pawn move that has no counterplay against it except the King's fianchetto (the Indian games involving ...g7-g6, ...Bf8-g7, and ...Ng8-f6). Thus, 1.e4 c5 is not so much indirect lightheadedness as it is a battle between initiative and opening flexibility. When white moves 2.Nf3, white not only adopts this manouverability between openings by developing the King's side but patronizes Black to give more information before attacking the Sicilian. There is another "chess style proof" I have developed encouraging this answer. 1.Nf3 c5 { 2.c4 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.d4 cxd4 5.Nxd4 Qb6 2.g3 Nc6 3.Bg2 d6 4.O-O Nf6 5.d3 g6 } Neither of these concepts justify anything superior to 1.Nf3 c5 2.e4 or 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3, so this proves understanding the Sicilian Defense is important. It is quite possible that the French Defense is much stronger because it has more strength counter-attack. 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.Nce2 c5 6.c3 Nc6 7.f4 b5 8.Nf3 Qb6 9.a3 a5 10.Be3 Bb7 11.dxc5 Bxc5 12.Bxc5 Nxc5 13.Ned4 b4 14.axb4 axb4 15.Rxa8+ Bxa8 16.Bb5 O-O 17.Bxc6 Bxc6 18.Nxc6 Qxc6 19.cxb4 Na4 20.O-O Rb8 -+ Since Virtual Chess 64, Titus Software changed the opening finality to this in making Virtual Kasparov. 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e5 Nfd7 5.f4 c5 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Be3 a6 8.Bd3 {Book answer...8.Qd2 b5 9.a3 Qb6 10.Ne2 Bb7 11.dxc5 Bxc5 12.Ned4 Rc8 13.b4 Bxd4 14.Nxd4 Nxd4 15.Bxd4 Rxc2 -+} Classical variation 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Nfd7 6.Bxe7 Qxe7 {The benefit from exchanging the bishops is obvious due to diagonal access from the decisions of the pawn structure formation, but without sufficient initiative, White falls to Black's center destruction.} Tarrasch variation, open counterplay 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 c5 4.exd5 Qxd5 5.Ngf3 cxd4 6.Bc4 {Although Black still has much resistance, this is probably the better way to pressure albeit maybe into a draw all the same.} It is obvious from these studies that the French Defense, instead of immediately halting d2-d4, develops openly until white moves 2.d4 or ?.d4 so that this pawn can immediately be attacked. The Queen's pawn is the most powerful of the eight pawns on the board because it is the center base. The King's pawn after 1.e4 has the two best squares above it and to the left. (Imagine 1...h6 2.d4 Nf6 3.e5. Unless Black wants to castle long insted of on the King's side, no knight on F6 is extremely dangerous in this game.) However, the King's pawn is more often traded or even sacrificed for extreme initiative--the force by which usually White wins due to extreme development in the power of time beforehand for positional tension. If the Queen's pawn is removed, there is virtually no center structure. (This is another reason why 1.d4 is stupid in reality :P, but humanity has apparently adopted it as a social standard.) Tomorrow I am researching how White can best play without moving 1.e4 e6 2.d4, as in these games the pawn on E6 rather anticipated d2-d4. Now it is a technical weakness. |
#60
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I forgot about Chessmaster Live! for Xbox 360. I played some games against the demo version...I want my license back, dammit.
Code:
1.h4 e5 2.Nf3 e4 3.Rg1 exf3 4.e3 fxg2 5.Qf3 gxf1=B 6.Qxf7+ Kxf7 7.d4 Bh3 8.Rf1 Bxf1 9.e4 Qf6!? 10.d5 Qf3 11.Nc3 Bb4 12.Kxf1 d6 13.a3 Bg4 14.Kg1 Bh3 15.axb4 Qg2# {10.Kxf1 Qf3 11.Nd2 Qd1+ 12.Kg2 d5 -+} 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.g4 Nxg4 3.Na3 e5 4.b3 e4 5.Bg2 Qf6 6.c3 g5?! 7.Nc4 exf3 8.O-O Qf4 9.Nd6+ cxd6 10.Re1 Qxh2+ 11.Kf1 fxg2# {4.h3 Nxf2! 5.Kxf2 e4 6.Nd4 Qf6+ 7.Ke3? c5! -+} {7.Bh3 Nxf2 8.Kxf2 Rg8 9.Rg1 h5 10.Nb5 Kd8 -+} 1.d4 e5 2.c4 exd4 3.Kd2 d5 4.Kc2 Bf5+ 5.Kb3 dxc4+ 6.Kxc4 b5+ 7.Kxb5 Qd5+ 8.Ka4 Bd7# 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.d4 d5 4.c3 exd4 5.Bf4 Bg4 6.Rg1 dxe4 7.Nxd4 Bxd1 8.Kxd1 c5 9.c4 Qxd4+ 10.Bd2 Qxf2 11.Bh6 Qxg1 12.Ke2 Ng4 13.Ke1 Na6 14.b4 Nxb4 15.Bg5 Qf2+ 16.Kd1 Qxf1+ 17.Kd2 Qd3+ 18.Kc1 Qc2# Pelikan 2.Nc3 d5 3.f4 c5 4.Nf3 Nc6 = Spielmann 2.b3 d5 = Steiner 2.c4 d5 = Unless white eventually moves d2-d4 this results in a hole, so this is inferior to just moving d4. Chigorin 2.Qe2 Man Chigorin was the shiz. For my study, his opening ideas were unique. He was the Russian savage by which Steinitz became world champion in a match. Even I didn't know about this continuation before checking the FIDE table of documented openings from history; I feel guilty for not considering it. This is still an important concept to understand, although it forces nothing. It continues the initiative favor behind 1.e4 games. In abandoning or at least delaying trying to maintain a pawn center with the pawn on E5, White plans on exhanging the pawn for the enemy's Queen's pawn (...Qxd5). After 2...Be7 there still isn't much for White to force, and the Tarrasch variation (2.d4 d5 3.Nd2) is perhaps a better way to exhange. There is also 1.e4 e6 2.Qe2 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.Nc3 Qd8 5.Nf3 Nf6 6.g3 b6 7.Bg2 Bb7 with better statistics for Black. Steinitz Attack 2.e5 d6 {3.f4? fxe5 4.fxe5 Qh4+ -+} "I have never in my life played the French--which is the dullest of all chess openings." --W. Steinitz, 1st FIDE world champion of chess This continuation wasn't adopted until later, but Steinitz played many other options besides the new 2.e5 in his games against the opening. Labourdonnais 2.f4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.Nf3 Nc6 = Two Knights 2.Nf3 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 = But 2.Nc3 c5 3.Nf3 a6 draws as well. Wing Gambit 2.Nf3 d5 3.e5 c5 4.b4 cxb4 5.a3 See also "Benko Gambit". Other than that, P-QN4 (b2-b4 or b7-b5) in opening theory has often been associated with the term "wing" in the names and the naming. There is a similar "Wing Gambit" in the Sicilian Defense. Normally a King's fianchetto (...Bf8-g7) avoids a thread like after Bc1xa3, but even 1...e6 creates a weakness. To be honest, these kinds of gambits are more based on style, and there is no win forced in these open games. In these games, machines play very differently than do humans. Last but not least is the King's Indian Attack, which can also be reached after 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.g3 d5 3.Bg2 c5 3.O-O e6. {3...Nc6 forces 4.d4 cxd4 5.Nxd4...e5?! 6.Nxc6 bxc6 7.c4.} This is a fascinating study to win against a machine, which loves only the counterplay for Black in these games. There was a game I played Nf6+ and eventually mated Titus on the kingside, so they're not invincible. This means, more time! For now just noting this, d2-d3 instead against the Sicilian in a game like 1.e4 c5 2.d3 e6 is inferior to 2...d6. |
![]() |
Tags |
download, harvest moon 64, is it safe, now_please_remeber_the_, project64istrojanhonest, titans_they_are_so_go, viruses |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|