Dear Lev,

Before this goes any further please take note that I don't intend on entering a lengthy discussing based on futile bickering and name calling. I know you have been involved in many such feuds in the past and I want no part of it! 
 
As regards 1. ...h5?, here is what you had to say about it :

[quote author=Lev D. Zilbermints link=1119806620/30#44 date=1121582603][quote author=ArKheiN  link=1119806620/40#42 date=1121531660]

1 e4 h5 may not be such a bad move. I have seen players play ...h5 in the Caro-Kann Defense with success, so it is not necessarily a bad idea.

  LDZ
[/quote]


In my opinion you were closer to the truth when you posted this.
An early ...h5 makes no sense combined with a kingside fianchetto, unless it's in response to an h4 flank attack.

As for the pawn blunder I was referring to, it occurs after a sequence of moves with which you may be familiar : 1. d4 Ktf6 ; 2. Ktc3 d5 ; 3. e4

                                                             Regards, 
                                                                 Hubert

[quote author=Bonsai link=1119806620/30#43 date=1121564957][quote author=ArKheiN  link=1119806620/40#42 date=1121531660].

And look at this great opening:
1.e4 h5 2.d4 c5 3.c3 [/quote]

After 3. d5, 3. dc or other moves, Black has a senseless version of the Benoni or Sicilian (what is the -h pawn doing on the 5th rank?).
I must agree with LDZ on this issue (!!). Black should play by analogy with the Caro-Kann.
2. ...c6 is the best move to keep the Black disadvantage within reasonable limits.
But of course the only consistant move is 2. ...h4 when 3. Ktf3 (3. Ktc3/3. Bc4/3. c4 are better, preventing ...d5, but I suppose Black could also reach this position through 1. Ktf3 h5 ; 2. e4 ; ok then 2. g3 is stronger) h3 ; 4. g3 (4. gh is also met by 4. ...d5 but ignoring Black's last move is probably best)
d5 ; 5. ed (after 5. e5 Black is just fine) Qxd5 ; 6. Ktc3 Qh5 ; 7. Be2 Bg4 leads to a position where Black might just be holding.
If you answer that the whole line is crap and not worth discussing, then of course you are right, but the point is that it is less crappy than White blundering a pawn on move 3!!

                                                                        Regards,
                                                                                UD

Quote:


I have not gone away. It is just that first, I have a lot of responsibilities as Executive Editor of the Rutgers-Newark Observer, my school's newspaper. Secondly, I was wondering myself about  why this forum was so quiet?

I am still playing the Zilbermints Gambit on the Internet Chess Club, with decent results. Recently won an easy game in the 9...Nxf3 10 Qxf3, the Exchange Sub-Variation.
There Black got mated on f7 before Castling!

These days I am also experimenting with unorthodox replies to the Sicilian Defense, 1 e4 c5. Had some good results with the Brick, 1 e4 c5 2 Nh3!? . Of course 1 e4 e5
2 f4 brings about the King's Gambit...

To respond, Leisebein plays the best moves in the Zilbermints Gambit. That is why he wins. So stop complaining  and start playing the Zilbermints Gambit in the Euwe Defense to the BDG!

I have yet to hear of an opening that is 100% correct.  If you find one, do let me know.  I'd rather like to have this chess game solved and be on with my life.

NeX iRae

Quote:

Have you not noticed that he has gone away?  Are you trying to prod him with a stick to see if he is alive?

- Lost Highway

this is a useless discussion, there are almost no gambits that are completly correct or sound. Zilberments only tries to prove his gambit with 5 min blitz games, whahahahaha, he should starting analysing in a way like Troksky figured out his famous 2 night vs pawn endgame and then come up with a conclusion. It just looks silly that he tries to prove that the gambit is correct. You can play it if you have like attacking positions, and ofcourse black has to play the correct move for a long time and mistakes are easyly made (explaning the good results from Leisebeim)
But still it is not correct. And up to 2400 you do not have to play correct openings, because nobody till that level plays without mistakes.
I play the Latvian gambit for myself with good results, But i am not gonna claim that the gambit is correct, I just like the positions and know how to play them.

so zilberments, GET A LIFE, and stop discussing this stupid gambit of yours

Quote:


Thank you for the nomination, but as Russian-born, I must decline. U.S. Senator would be better.  Senators are there far longer than presidents, you know? Just look at Democrat Robert Byrd. Eighty-seven years old, in his ninth term, has not lost an election since 1946! How does he do that?

Not losing a single election in almost 60 years! Jesus Christ... that's one for the Guinness Book of Records.

Gambit, et al:

First of all, I'd like to point out that I have been one of many who have been ganging up on you lately, and your responses have definitely improved!  If only our American president could admit to making mistakes and trying to correct them, the world would be a better place!    

It's very easy to read things in the worst possible light on the internet where we can't read body language, so "typos" become that much more critical.  It's good to see that you're working on that aspect of your messages and articles.