Has Fluffy ever made a chess-related contribution?  Point made (again).  Can we get back to chess?  I often wonder if Alumbrado's boredom with the BDG has less to do with the opening and more to do with absence of chess content in the threads.  That said, I'm shocked that the London System doesn't provoke such heated debate--given all the controversy surrounding it...

Quote:


Well, Tom Cruise is a busy person... he rarely has time to talk with average people. 

A "BDG nut", huh? Why don't you, "fluffy", call people who play other openings nuts too? Is Karpov, who plays the Caro-Kann a lot, a "Caro-Kann nut" ? No, just a devoted player of that opening. 

More to the point, I think you, "fluffy", are just prejudiced against the BDG. How about you try playing the BDG yourself?

Before I sign off, let me point out that the Bogoljubow Defense is not that difficult to play against. Just exchange the pesky Bg7, put the Queen to h4 and the Knight to g5 and you are all set. This is called the Studier Attack. And just to make sure everything is OK, move the pawn to h3 to stop the Bishop-for-Knight exchange. Play the following sample line:

1 d4 d5 2 e4 de4 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 f3 ef3 5 Mxf3 g6 6 Bc4 Bg7
7 00 00 8 h3! c6 9 Qe1 Nbd7 10 Qh4 Nb6 11 Bd3 Nd5  12 Bh6 Nxc3 13 bxc3 c5  14 Ng5! and it's all over for Black. If White plays 11 Bb3 rather than 11 Bd3, his attack is even stronger.

More can be found in the thread on the Bogoljubow Defense.

Quote:



I dare seriously question your assessment! My responses:

(1) To say that between masters BDG is a draw, is nonsense. Go and check the book "Blackmar-Diebert Gambit" by NM Charles Diebert, 1991. You will find plenty of Diebert's BDG wins against masters there.
No, if the Smith-Morra Gambit can defeat masters, then why not the BDG? After all the S-M Gambit has similar themes -- except that it is on the Queenside.

(2) Well, masters have played the BDG -- and they still have not taught amateurs how to counter it! Your argument is flawed, sir. It is like saying, that if masters played the King's Gambit --similar to the BDG by the way-- then amateurs could learn to counter it?! The KG has been around for hundreds of years, with no refutation. The BDG has been around since 1932, also with no refutation.

(3) "Sort of tacit agreement no to disclose a good defense against the BDG??" Oh, please... This is again flawed. What are you afraid of? That there is no good defense? That your analyses might not stand up to scrutiny by a BDG expert? For every anti-BDG line, two more pro-BDG lines are found.

Check the threads here. You will find discussion on the Lemberger Counter Gambit (1d4 d5 2 e4 de4 3 Nc3 e5);
the Gunderam Defense; the Euwe Defense; the Teichmann Defense, just to name a few.

So step forward and submit your analyses!

Quote:


quite frankly, i wish there were more of these players around! 

Even as a "positional" 1. d4 player I like the initiative too, will gladly go for 5. Bf4 QGD, Vienna, 5. Bg5 Semislav etc with these lines available, why will anyone go for the BDG? I do not think white's development is any slower.

By the way, that monty python hollywood bowl show was hilarious, and the Meaning of Life is quite brilliant too!

Quote:


Actually, if you look, I wasn't arbitrarily shouting "Albatross," but only when the conversation went off-track and people started insulting each other.  Read my posts, and you'll see I'm all in favor of people discussing any opening they want--so long as they stick to chess and not insult each other.

Where you are coming from and what you are talking about often remains a mystery, however.  Could you please provide the analysis you have promised on a number of occasions?  It would give us something to talk about other than sea birds (although, with reference to Coleridge--no, he wasn't a member of Monty Python--I can't help but think that the BDG is a bit of an albatross to one's chess development)...

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. e4 dxe4 4. f3 c6 and here Diebert didnt choose the "standard"  and surely  the best move : 5.Bc4

And like MNb said, this transposed to a Ryder gambit : 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Qxf3 when Black have played 5..c6 and White 6.Be3 and here again, the "standard" Ryder gambit move would be 6.Bd3

So, this is not the best BDG or Ryder gambit start choosen by Diebert here.

The Albatross Skit is an old Monty Python bit.  John Cleese is wandering around trying to sell an albatross.  On another thread, MNb noted that all the personal attacks were starting to sound silly and were worthy of a Monty Python skit, so I took to shouting "Albatross!" as a means of delicately suggesting that a discussion had lost its way.  Top Notch clearly liked the sound of being able to shout "Albatross!" (and why not?), and has begun appending it to all messages...

"I did not know that the Danish was refuted"
Müller/Voigt come close to it in their recent book, as far as the double pawn sac 4.Bc4 is concerned.

That game Diebert-Ivanov is not really an O'Kelly Defense, but a transposition to the Ryder Gambit:
4.f3 exf3 5.Qxf3 c6 6.Be3.