Latest Updates:
1  Chess Publishing Openings / Daring Defences to 1. d4 / Grünfeld / Re: Symmetrical "Grunfeld"
 on: Today at 08:06:33 
TonyRo wrote yesterday at 15:01:32:
but there is worse. What do you play after 1.Nf3 d5 2.g3 g6 3.Bg2 Bg7, or 1.Nf3 g6 2.g3 Bg7? I would play d4 in both cases, but then you don't get that Anglo-Grunfeld option. I could go 2.e4 against the Modern.

You also could allow yourself some hooliganry and play 1.Nf3 g6 2.h4; some pretty strong players have tried it.

TonyRo wrote yesterday at 15:01:32:
There is a mild downside that in some lines of the b3 KID you are committed to Bb2 too soon, e.g. 5...d6 6.b3 c5 7.c4! is not possible now, you'd transpose to 7.Bb2 cxd4 8.Nxd4 when if I remembering the position correctly, 8...d5! is possible. Not a big deal at all to me (I think my notes I think I thought that 9.c4!? dxc4 10.Na3 was at least interesting),

How about 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.g3 g6 3.b3 Bg7 4.Bb2 O-O 5.Bg2 d6 6.c4 c5 (e5) 7.O-O Nc6 8.d4 ?
Or 6.d4 (iso 6.c4) c5 7.c4 (White has played Bb2 iso O-O)?
The question of course becomes what is the mildest downside; that's up to you anyhow.

2  Chess Publishing Openings / Daring Defences to 1. d4 / Grünfeld / Re: Symmetrical "Grunfeld"
 on: Today at 08:05:53 
TonyRo wrote yesterday at 15:01:32:
but there is worse. What do you play after 1.Nf3 d5 2.g3 g6 3.Bg2 Bg7, or 1.Nf3 g6 2.g3 Bg7? I would play d4 in both cases, but then you don't get that Anglo-Grunfeld option. I could go 2.e4 against the Modern.

You also could allow yourself some hooliganry and play 2.h4; some pretty strong players have tried it.

[quote author=497273644F721D0 link=1601297423/8#8 date=1601305292]There is a mild downside that in some lines of the b3 KID you are committed to Bb2 too soon, e.g. 5...d6 6.b3 c5 7.c4! is not possible now, you'd transpose to 7.Bb2 cxd4 8.Nxd4 when if I remembering the position correctly, 8...d5! is possible. Not a big deal at all to me (I think my notes I think I thought that 9.c4!? dxc4 10.Na3 was at least interesting),
Indeed this issue is unavoidable after 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.g3 g6 3.b3.

3  Chess Publishing Openings / Daring Defences to 1. d4 / Grünfeld / Re: Symmetrical "Grunfeld"
 on: Today at 06:52:42 
I also play 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.g3 and I thought I can bypass the symmetrical Grunfeld with 3.b3.

I didnt like neither the lines where Black plays quickly d5+c5 where you end up in a sort of reversed Benko.

Nor the lines when after 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.g3 g6 3.b3 Bg7 4.Bb2 d6 5.d4 and Black can interfere with a quick c5, even followed by Qa5+ and you have to put something on d2 now.

The other repertoire issue is obviously after 1.Nf3 g6

I think a lot of Sieleckis repertoire is even better for Nf3/g3 players, because you are not only extremely flexible, you just can avoid his weakest parts (especially the d5/Bf5 chapters where Sielecki just misses Blacks best setup) and go for Retis instead. And probalby some minor adjustments in other lines (f.e. I like some ideas of Svane and Meier in the KID-lines)

I decided to go for the symmetrical Grunfeld anyway. It is the most complicated and demanding part in Sieleckis repertoire in my opinion and a lot of work, but that exactly is its strength, especially the Qc1-lines of the c5-mainline more and more feels like my private territory and -at least in my recent online games- even strong titled players mess this up a lot.

4  Chess Publishing Openings / Flank Openings / Re: Chessable Botvinnik English
 on: Yesterday at 22:21:25 
This question has also been asked in the discussion section of the Chessable course.....seems that 2 e4 is the recommendation against both 1...c6 and 1....e6.

5  General / General Chess / Re: Correspondence Chess 2020
 on: Yesterday at 21:37:51 
Hi again.

I realised there was an omission on my part
ICCF Old Archives Complete (non-server) download in Pgn format
96585 games

I did not put in the database I put together (also no ICCF chess 960). Should have thought about that. In other words any ICCF number given by me earlier would be without that. I guess the only correct thing to do is to alongside the files you manage make and manage a spreadsheet of the sources for the database. Will have to do that at some point.

Have a nice day.

P.S. on ICCF there is also World Championship Finals 1-30 updated 01/01/2020 but I assumed this was in their Server Complete until 31-12-2019 file, anyone know if this is correct?

6  General / General Chess / Re: Correspondence Chess 2020
 on: Yesterday at 21:15:23 
Hi.

Ok. I will have to check the individual sources then and add them all up. Quite possible I've missed something in the merging process (or do you have other sources?). Prolly do it when I update though, i.e. when ICCF releases new games.

It's from lechenichers site. They hosted (host?) tournaments for these two other organisations ASPCC and DESC apparently. Only 694+612 games though so not the largest thing. Hopefully they are also not duplicated in the Complete Archive of Games played on LSS. Dunno that actually.

Archive of ASPCC Tournaments played on LSS upto Dec 2019      694      0.1 MB      0.1 MB      87      78      
1/20/20
Archive of DESC Tournaments played on LSS upto Dec 2019      612      0.1 MB      0.1 MB      96      62      
1/21/20

Chessfriend is, I think, an old non-operational site that Lechenicher provides a games archive for.

Agreed that ICCF and Lechenicher are clearly most important.

Have a nice day.

7  General / General Chess / Re: Correspondence Chess 2020
 on: Yesterday at 21:06:13 
My downloaded corr only database is 1,728,774 so not sure whats in the chessbase product or Chessfriendall
ASPCC&DESClechenichertournamentsto201912

But essentially the two problems is always de-duping and getting a program to handle a database that large.

Anyways, I would argue quality over quantity anyhow... LSS and ICCF are quality games for the most part... others not so much.

8  General / General Chess / Re: Correspondence Chess 2020
 on: Yesterday at 20:59:08 
trw wrote yesterday at 19:35:37:
Love it. I was already considering going back to LSS over ICCF... that kinda seals the deal.

Cool. I also think it is a good initiative.

Confused_by_Theory wrote yesterday at 16:36:51:
Just out of curiosity. I've now merged the ICCF games and Lechenicher (+IECG et al. found on Lechenichers site) into a single database. Can't remember the exact number of games that the database ended up with (1.2-1.3 million asfair) and I am currently on a bus so can't check but it seems to me like there is a few hundred thousand games more in the chessbase corr database (over 1.6 million).

What could these games be? 1804 to ca. 1990 postal games? Or is chessbase just better at finding games generally.
Edit: I actually have 2018 corr base so can check how many non server games myself. Will do later.

Ok so I have some numbers now. Sadly don't have corr 2020.

Chessbase corr database 2018
1 431 813 games
of which:
Chessbase corr database 2018 years all games 1804-1990 (up to and including)
176747 games

Chessbase corr database 2020 (€190 Wink)
1 600 000 games minimum ("over 1.6million")

My downloaded database comprised of:
ICCFto202008
Lechenicherto202006
IECGall
Chessfriendall
ASPCC&DESClechenichertournamentsto201912

1 279 611

Imo it looks like most of the discrepancy between what you can download yourself and the comercial corr-base could indeed be non-server events. There is obviously also postal events 1991 and later which didn't make the cut here due to my arbitrary cut off year 1990. That is sort of heartening as old postal games are not the most relevant to have in modern day corr database (at least ones for competitive use only) and it probably means I don't have to buy a new corrbase Grin.

Have a nice day.

9  General / General Chess / Re: Correspondence Chess 2020
 on: Yesterday at 19:35:37 
Confused_by_Theory wrote yesterday at 15:55:52:
Hi.

I saw the Lechenicher message about an algorithm for unwarranted delay of game (20200923). Guess it is interesting information. Hope it works out well.

"Dear Chessfriends,

in the past there have been many complaints about games where one player started moving slowly esp in a lost position, partially using the 30-day-per-individual-move rule to its extreme. To my opinion, this is not a good attitude of sportsmanship.

I have therefore developed a measure against this. Depending on the position, the used time of reflection and the ratings of both players, the server can detect such games with a high probability. Actually, the delay of games is already part of the LSS Rules, but was not in effect so far.

Effective 1st October, 2020, such games will now be stopped by the server and the delaying player will be suspended for 3 weeks to start new tournaments. Further penalties might be introduced, if required.

The algorithm will not be revealed to avoid misuse and it might be due to change without notice.

Best wishes
Ortwin Pätzold"


An algorithm sounds like a very sharp way of trying to solve the problem compared to some more blunt but easier to understand regulation.

Have a nice day.



Love it. I was already considering going back to LSS over ICCF... that kinda seals the deal.

10  Chess Publishing Openings / Flank Openings / Chessable Botvinnik English
 on: Yesterday at 19:32:06 
This course has just been published, done by Simon Williams and Richard Palliser. It has an interesting move order e.g. 1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 to get to the Botvinnik. Against e6, it goes 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6 3.Nc3 with the Mikenas. However, it doesn't reveal the recommendations against two of the soundest replies i.e. 1.c4 e6 or 1.c4 c6. If they stick with 2.Nc3 this would lead to main line d4 lines and lots of theory. If 2.g3. that's still a lot of theory and strategy to leave to the apparent footnotes of the course. Anyone know ?

 
  Top