Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) C41: Newark gambit (Read 47799 times)
Smyslov_Fan
YaBB Moderator
Correspondence fan
*****
Offline


Progress depends on the
unreasonable man. ~GBS

Posts: 6902
Joined: 06/15/05
Re: C41: Newark gambit
Reply #65 - 06/18/13 at 17:05:08
Post Tools
You're all right. It's time to lock this thread.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bibs
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2112
Joined: 10/24/06
Re: C41: Newark gambit
Reply #64 - 06/18/13 at 13:07:10
Post Tools
Translation of Gambit's post:

'I will post more analysis. But it will not be any good. Easy to refute, and you will quickly refute. But some people will go wrong in bullet games online and I will win some games. So I am happy, I am delusional, and you are wrong. Trolled!'

SF - step in please. Given him some rope. Duly hanged himself.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Stigma
God Member
*****
Offline


There is a crack in everything.

Posts: 3034
Joined: 11/07/06
Gender: Male
Re: C41: Newark gambit
Reply #63 - 06/18/13 at 10:09:40
Post Tools
Gambit wrote on 06/18/13 at 03:08:26:
Third, I mentioned the computer because both times that the move was found, it took a chess engine to do it. Just citing the facts.

Last, best play by both sides, you say? Hmmm, that might not always be the case! That is how chess is, regardless of opening! Best play by both sides is not always the case!


In play, we can't expect best play, especially if the players are not world class. But this thread is about analysis, and there best play by both sides is what we should focus on, since that should be the main line. Surely you see the difference?
  

Improvement begins at the edge of your comfort zone. -Jonathan Rowson
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Gambit
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 1384
Location: Newark
Joined: 07/26/05
Gender: Male
Re: C41: Newark gambit
Reply #62 - 06/18/13 at 03:08:26
Post Tools
Markovich wrote on 06/18/13 at 00:26:33:
How do you know how I found 6.Nc3, Lev? Do you suppose that you are the only one here with a brain?  I suggest that some of your brain power might have been expended on 5.Bb3 before recommending 4...b5 here and elsewhere. But since when is a refutation not a refutation because (hypothetically) it was found with silicon assistance?

Best play for both sides after 4...b5 leads to a big advantage for White, do you deny that? If you do, produce your lines. Otherwise, concede that 4...b5 is no good and stop equivocating.

By the way, Lev, your 5.Bxg8 idea just smells bad. Why would White want to exchange his potent B, especially in context of Black's having weakened the a2-g8 diagonal, for a piece that hasn't even moved yet?? 5.Bxb5+ is equally a stinker, distracting the B in exchange for a mere pawn. So according to you, crappy chess is good, while strong, winning chess is "avoiding all the fun," am I right?

For me, playing winning moves is great fun. Not you?


Crappy chess? Hardly. Accepting the gambit is not crappy chess. That is what a real chess player would do. No less a great than Bobby Fischer once said, "A gambit's refutation begins with its acceptance."

Next, the 5 Bxg8 line is known from the closely-related Strautins Variation of the Latvian Gambit. That line goes 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 f5 3 Bc4 b5 4 Bxg8 Rxg8. I was not the first one to try the 5 Bxg8 line, especially since I am playing Black!.

Third, I mentioned the computer because both times that the move was found, it took a chess engine to do it. Just citing the facts.

Last, best play by both sides, you say? Hmmm, that might not always be the case! That is how chess is, regardless of opening! Best play by both sides is not always the case!

I will produce my lines when I have put together the games I am playing on ICC with the Newark Gambit. Might take a bit of time, given that my printer is not working and I have to copy the moves by hand.
Be warned, the lines might not be what the perfectionist expects!
  
Back to top
YIM  
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: C41: Newark gambit
Reply #61 - 06/18/13 at 00:26:33
Post Tools
How do you know how I found 6.Nc3, Lev? Do you suppose that you are the only one here with a brain?  I suggest that some of your brain power might have been expended on 5.Bb3 before recommending 4...b5 here and elsewhere. But since when is a refutation not a refutation because (hypothetically) it was found with silicon assistance?

Best play for both sides after 4...b5 leads to a big advantage for White, do you deny that? If you do, produce your lines. Otherwise, concede that 4...b5 is no good and stop equivocating.

By the way, Lev, your 5.Bxg8 idea just smells bad. Why would White want to exchange his potent B, especially in context of Black's having weakened the a2-g8 diagonal, for a piece that hasn't even moved yet?? 5.Bxb5+ is equally a stinker, distracting the B in exchange for a mere pawn. So according to you, crappy chess is good, while strong, winning chess is "avoiding all the fun," am I right?

For me, playing winning moves is great fun. Not you?
  

The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Gambit
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 1384
Location: Newark
Joined: 07/26/05
Gender: Male
Re: C41: Newark gambit
Reply #60 - 06/17/13 at 22:29:36
Post Tools
Markovich wrote on 06/17/13 at 03:21:34:
Wonderful Lev, but none of that answers my criticism of the so-called Newark Gambit, which is the subject of this thread. 4...b5 has been refuted, you agree?


No, I do not. The reasons are very simple: both people who found your move used a chess computer! That is first.

Second, I am always looking for improvements, and very well might find something to counter your proposed variation.

Third, 5 Bb3 is just running, avoiding all the fun.

Fourth, I play the Newark Gambit online, OTB  and in certain correspondence games and I win with it!
« Last Edit: 06/18/13 at 03:15:07 by Gambit »  
Back to top
YIM  
IP Logged
 
Smyslov_Fan
YaBB Moderator
Correspondence fan
*****
Offline


Progress depends on the
unreasonable man. ~GBS

Posts: 6902
Joined: 06/15/05
Re: C41: Newark gambit
Reply #59 - 06/18/13 at 17:03:10
Post Tools
Off-Topic replies have been moved to this Topic.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: C41: Newark gambit
Reply #58 - 06/17/13 at 03:21:34
Post Tools
Wonderful Lev, but none of that answers my criticism of the so-called Newark Gambit, which is the subject of this thread. 4...b5 has been refuted, you agree?
  

The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Gambit
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 1384
Location: Newark
Joined: 07/26/05
Gender: Male
Re: C41: Newark gambit
Reply #57 - 06/15/13 at 05:28:17
Post Tools
... I win with my openings precisely because I know their tricky, unorthodox nuances better than the other players do.

Time and again, in OTB play and even some correspondence play, I never see  6 Nc3. There were only two times that I saw this move. One was in discussion last year on this site. The other was earlier this year in casual analyses with a chess-friend of mine at the West Orange Chess Club last month.

In both cases, a chess computer was used to help!

Of course, to refute Lev's tricky ideas a machine is needed! Like a human brain is not enough...

Excuse my sarcasm, but that's my viewpoint.

For the record, I played 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 f5 4 Bc4 b5 more than three dozen times since 2003. I have played all kinds of players, in OTB play, blitz, correspondence. These ranged from weaklings to Grandmasters. Not a single one found 5 Bb3 fxe4
6 Nc3.

At the moment, I am testing out 4 Bc4 b5 5 Bb3 c6 at the Internet Chess Club. Some interesting games have been played.

knightrunner - Zilbermints
Internet Chess Club
5 0 unrated
15 June 2013

1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 f5 4 Bc4 b5 5 Bb3 c6!?
6 dxe5 fxe4 7 Nc3 exf3 8 Qf3 Qd7 9 Nxb5 d5 10 Nd4 Bc5 11 e6 Qe7 12 Be3 Bxd4 13 Bd4 Nf6 =+ 0-1/24.

I would love to give an OTB game, but quite frankly, I don't have any with this sub-variation. The same goes for correspondence.

Finally, I beat IM Martica Fierro with the Philidor Counter Gambit in a simultaneous on 28 May 2013.
Time control was 30 minute 30 second increment, unrated.

1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 d6 3 d4 f5 4 dxe5 fxe4 5 Ng5 d5 6 e6 Bc5 7 Nxe4 Be7 8 Ng5 Bxg5 9 Qh5+ g6 10 Qxg5 Qxg5 11 Bxg5 Be6 12 Nc3 c6 13 000 h6 14 Bh4 g5
15 Bg3 Nf6 = 0-1/61.

I offered her a draw twice, but she refused. Oh well... I got to win the game!

 
Edited:
Post edited to remove inflammatory remarks. ~SF June 15, 2013

« Last Edit: 06/15/13 at 16:09:18 by Smyslov_Fan »  
Back to top
YIM  
IP Logged
 
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4514
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: C41: Newark gambit
Reply #56 - 06/14/13 at 04:08:37
Post Tools
So Black would, what, have a dream to end up only an exchange and a pawn down?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Gambit
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 1384
Location: Newark
Joined: 07/26/05
Gender: Male
Re: C41: Newark gambit
Reply #55 - 06/14/13 at 03:45:20
Post Tools
Smyslov_Fan wrote on 06/13/13 at 22:04:26:
Here's a refutation of 5...c6. It's not surprising at all that this is refuted considering the fundamental rules of development that were ignored.

Please Gambit, check your variations more carefully before posting them. Also, if you discuss this with a titled player, get that titled player to make comments here too please.



Why don't you try 5...c6  6 exf5 e4 7 Ng5 Nf6!
  
Back to top
YIM  
IP Logged
 
Smyslov_Fan
YaBB Moderator
Correspondence fan
*****
Offline


Progress depends on the
unreasonable man. ~GBS

Posts: 6902
Joined: 06/15/05
Re: C41: Newark gambit
Reply #54 - 06/13/13 at 22:04:26
Post Tools
Here's a refutation of 5...c6. It's not surprising at all that this is refuted considering the fundamental rules of development that were ignored.

Please Gambit, check your variations more carefully before posting them. Also, if you discuss this with a titled player, get that titled player to make comments here too please.

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Smyslov_Fan
YaBB Moderator
Correspondence fan
*****
Offline


Progress depends on the
unreasonable man. ~GBS

Posts: 6902
Joined: 06/15/05
Re: C41: Newark gambit
Reply #53 - 06/13/13 at 21:57:47
Post Tools
I just want to be clear, this is a chess site. I will not be locking threads just because someone asks me to. If analysis is posted in good faith and a refutation is also posted in good faith, there is no problem.

Problems arise when the refutation of the line is clear and the poster continues to argue about it. One of the beautiful things about chess analysis is that "On the chessboard lies and hypocrisy do not last long."

Gambit, it is up to you now to present a clear argument, not just a single line, that hasn't been carefully vetted to show why we should take 5...c6 more seriously than 6...c6.


I will closely monitor this thread to make sure it does not become problematic. But so far, it has not crossed that line.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Gambit
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 1384
Location: Newark
Joined: 07/26/05
Gender: Male
Re: C41: Newark gambit
Reply #52 - 06/13/13 at 17:06:48
Post Tools
6 exf5 e4! 7 Qe2 d5! 8 Ng5 Nf6 9 f3 Bxf5 10 fxe4 Nxe4 11 Nc3 Bb4 12 Bd2 Bxc3 13 bxc3 00 =+
  
Back to top
YIM  
IP Logged
 
Bibs
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2112
Joined: 10/24/06
Re: C41: Newark gambit
Reply #51 - 06/13/13 at 08:44:45
Post Tools
This is simply tosh.
If Gambit cannot justify with more than single move 'analysis', shut down the thread.
Avoid time wasting (ah, the troll got me too, woe), back to proper chess.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo