I dont think u can use a simultanious game by kramnik, or anyone, to prove anything. When GMs play simultanous games they will not necessarily go into a critical line which the opponent is well prepared, but try to use the difference in class in middlegame and endgames. As yermolinsky once said, a lot of players would look like GMs ithey were to play their pet openings.

Darth--let it go.  We were actually getting back to chess here...

So I lied--I shall post again--

Quote:


All I can say here is please reread my thoughts on this subject carefully. You obviously don't understand what I was saying. So I'll give you a second chance.

Quote:
I didn't say Kramnik you fool. I said Kasparov. I hate Kramnik. No fire--no drive. Kasparov is my hero. Kramnik would chicken out in the caro-kann for god's sake. Kasparov on the other hand would most likely have a strong line against it. So, no, you did not prove a point. 

Quote:



...WTF...<does double take>...<starts cracking up in insane laughter>...Oh the irony...

I get too excited!!?? Wow--First you act like you have a girlfriend, and then you say I am getting too excited. Someone's obviously living a lie...

Oh yeah, by the way--lets actually see some of these lines against IM's. Not saying there aren't any...but all through out this thread there are countless times where you say "I won a nice game..." or "I have a really nice record against..." and you usually follow up this train of thought with "but I'll post that game for some other time."
Stop talking and post already so we can analyse!!

To Lev, I found that game in a german CC server where Leisebein plays a lot, for example he is running more than 100 games at the same times! And he only plays BDG with White here, the finished score is really good with about 114 win 73 draw and 7 loses with White.
About Nc6 against euwe defense there was only 6 games played where Leisebein played 3 with 8.a3 and 3 with your gambit. I gave one of the 3 games with your gambit, I have another against 9..c5 where he plays 10.Bxf6 with a forced draw by repetition by Black after 25 moves. The third games with your gambit is about 9..c6 with a win from Leisbein where his opponent have not played "the critical variation" accorded by Leisebein.

In that server, after the reaching of the starter position of the BDG people played  37 games in the Teichmann, 19 with the Bogoliubov, 12 with the Gunderam, 11 in the Euwe(6 with Nc6)
4 with c6 and 2 with Nc6. From the time I  have recolted all the games he played on that server, he finished somes new games . 59%of winning with White with BDG against a rate of 2100 average, counting others deviations like benoni or french and only 3% of loses is really good.

He has a rate of 2300+on that server, and stay on the top from from 268 members. (He plays as much with Black than White so, it discrease his score a bit with mores loses and draws with Black)

Quote:



Hey, Darthkrieger,

  Obviously, you and I speak two different languages. I maintain that the Zilbermints Gambit is a good opening to play, while you say to the contrary. That said, I think you need to understand that I do understand people's arguments. I just do not agree with them, for reasons posted earlier.

  DK, I told you that I have no problems playing against the world's best with the BDG... but they do not show up in my area! Do you understand what is being said, or should I spell it out? 

  Cheap tactics and tricks is something you can find in ANY chess opening.  The BDG teaches positional play (where to put pieces properly for attacking); maximizing your advantage; tactics; and attacking. That is a far cry from "cheap tactics and tricks" that you say.

  If you go to Tom Purser's (ex-Editor-in-Chief of BDG World magazine, 1983-1998) website, you will see a 1999 game where Vladimir Kramnik played the Black side of a BDG in a simul. Guess what??

Kramnik chickened out with (1 d4 d5 2 e4 de4 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 f3) 4...e3?! . The game eventually ended in a draw.
So do not tell me masters are so brave!   

Buss,R (2194) - Kramnik,V (2755)
Simultan, Zürich, 05.09.1999
[Buss]
1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.f3 e3 Mit diesem Zug hatte ich am wenigsten gerechnet. Er ist jedoch bei Weitem nicht so schlecht wie sein Ruf. 5.Bxe3 e6 6.Bd3 [6.f4!?] 6...Nbd7 7.Nge2 c5 8.0-0 Be7 9.Bf2 0-0 10.Ne4 b6 11.c3 Bb7 12.N2g3 Qc7 13.Qc2 c4 14.Be2 b5 15.Rfe1 a6 16.Nf1 Rfe8 17.Nfd2 Rac8 18.Bd1 Bd5 19.Bg3 Qc6 20.f4 Nxe4 21.Nxe4 f5 22.Ng5 Nf6 23.Bf3 Bf8 24.Bxd5 Nxd5 25.Re2 h6 26.Nf3 Bd6 27.Ne5 Qb7 28.a3 Nf6 29.Bf2 Ne4 30.Ree1 a5 31.Qe2 Qd5 32.Qh5 Bxe5 33.fxe5 Ra8 34.Be3 Qd7 35.g4 Qf7 36.Qxf7+ Kxf7 37.Rf1 g6 38.gxf5 gxf5 39.d5 Rg8+ 40.Kh1 exd5 41.Rxf5+ Ke6 42.Raf1 Rg6 43.Rh5 b4 44.axb4 axb4 45.cxb4 Rb8 46.Bd4 Rxb4 47.Rg1 (=) Eine mögliche Folge wäre: 47...Rxg1+ 48.Kxg1 Rb3 49.Rxh6+ Ke7 50.Rh7+ Ke6 51.Rh6+ 1/2-1/2

Source: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/4902/games/kramnik.html

Does this prove my point? I should think so!!

  I kicked IM butt in a BDG in some games... which I will post here soon.

  Oh, and DK, you get too excited writing this. Learn to spell properly.

I will post a CC game from Leisebein against Friedrich Fritz in 2003 where the game goes : 1. e4 d5 2. d4 dxe4 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. f3 exf3 5. Nxf3 e6 6.  
Bg5 Be7 7. Bd3 Nc6 8. O-O Nxd4 9. Kh1 c5 10. Ne5 O-O 
and now 11.Qe1 Nd5 12.Bxe7 Qxe7 13.Qg3 f6 14.Ng6 Qc7 15.Qh4 Rd8 16.Nxd5 exd5 17.Rae1 hxg6 18.Bxg6 Ne6 19.Rxe6 Bxe6 20.Qh7 Rf8 21.Rxf6 gxf6 22.Qxc7 Rd7 23.Qxc5 Rg7 24.Bd3 b6 25.Qd4 Rh8 26.h3 Rh5 27.Kg1 Re5 28.Qh4 Rg5 29.c3 Bf7 30.Qh7 Kf8 31.Qh4 Rg7 32.Qh7 Kf8 31.Qh4 Kg7 32.Qh7 Kf8 33.Qh6 Ke7 34.h4
Rh5 35.Qe3 Be6 36.g3 Kf7 37.Qf3 Rh8 38.Kf2 Rg8 39.h5 Rg5 40.h6 Rd8 41.Qf4 Rg4 42.Qc7 Rd7 43.Qc6 Rg8 44.h7 Rf8 45.Kf3 Re8 46.Qa4 Rde7 47.Qd4 Rg7 48.g4 Bf7 49.g5 Re6 50.Kg2 a5 51.a4 and Black resigned.

It was a nice and difficult game, but I did not analyse the game deeply yet, if someone wants, just do it yourself and post it there.

That was a fun post, Patrik.  As far as computers go, well, humans still have more imagination, and often that is enough.

1. e4 d5 2. d4 dxe4 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. f3 exf3 5. Nxf3 e6 6. 
Bg5 Be7 7. Bd3 Nc6 8. O-O Nxd4 9. Kh1 c5 10. Ne5 O-O 

(11. Rxf6 Bxf6 12. Bxh7+ Kxh7 13. Qh5+ Kg8 14. Ne4 Bxg5 15.Nxg5 Qxg5 16.Qxg5 f6)

11.Qe1 Nd5 12.Bxh7+ Kxh7 13.Qh4+ Kg8 14.Ne4 Nf5 15.Rxf5 exf5 16.Bxe7 Qxe7 17. Ng5 Nf6 18.Ngxf7 Qxf7 19.Nxf7 Rxf7

(These are Sevenviolets' lines, cleaned up a bit.)

and in both cases, with R+N+B for the queen, Black is quite happy.

As far as the cult of BDG, a lot of this is obviously due to the oddballs who stray into view every once and a while.  Sevenviolets' post shows that he has escaped this fate -- he has even provided analysis from the Black side of the board.  (That is enough to be excommunicated, I think!)