Quote:


Bladez,

No. It was meant to be a satire at the drama unfolded by this whole thread. It was inspired by Gabriel Garcia Marques' Novel "Chronicle of a Death Fore Told" It had nothing to do with you or your analysis. Please don't reply to this. I don't want to be involved in this thread any further.

1.  I never ever claimed the following -- " an important revelation not known to chess fraternity" And you should not interpret it that way just because I spoke so proudly about it.  The revelation came from you interpreting it in that manner.  After I gave the invitation not to attack anyone, you go ahead and post what you did above.

2.  Since White is obviously playing for a win and the one who carries most if not all of the burden to establish an advantage in the opening, when Black plays a line that objectively or truthfully should give him a comfortable game or deny White of what he is looking for, then it is a problem for White.  That is how what I said should be interpreted because it is what I meant.  A problem does not have to be interpreted as a refutation.   If you don't know what I mean by saying this or that, you can just ask me.

3.  Unless you find 14...  Nc6 in some database, it could be a new idea here.  When you say I claimed any moves before this to be new that is just not right.

4.  When I shared my evaluation of the position I wrote the following :

"I took some time to really evaluate the position here and the appreciate the trumps for Black since White's trumps are already clearly ideantified. Black has valuable trumps that are stong enough to counter 
White's. In fact, his trumps must be used immediately since they rely on the temporary weakness of White's position. The Weakness of White's King is just as real and exploitable as Black's Kingside. One of the immediate weakness is that it sits on the open file. The pinned White Knight, White's weakness on the Q side which is significant only because Black can infiltrate with theQueen and find avenues of approach to Black's Kingside after the Q has caused some wreck on the Q side. The better placement of Black's pieces compared to White's, and last but not least Black has a better control of the center."

Fritz or any other programme did not "speak" to me to tell all of this.  I did this on my own.  It also was my motivation to want to show that Black is all right, that given  the circumstances, that the future from this position should at least be good for him as much as it is good for White.

When I gave an exclamation mark to .... Re8 it was also because of the key idea to play the Rook on the open file facing off with White's King.

I shared the reason I did not even consider to post 17. a3.  17. a3 is a suggestion by Fritz, but I thought it made no sense.  I wrote-- " I mean, a3 does nothing for White's development or his attack and does nothing vs the threat of ....Bxc4."   The response Bxc4 does not come from the computer, but rather from the belief that Black must utilize his trumps.

If you keep assuming I let a computer do everything, you are wrong.  I use it for the same reasons that other people use it, it is a great companion when things get messy or when there is complex tactical melee ahead.  I have been playing the game over 21 years;  I  also know a thing or two.

5.  Your post could be interpreted as a means to just attack me or talk negatively about me.  I say "could" hoping (very little hope)  that I am misinterpreting it.  Just in case this applies, attack the ideas not the person.  You have NO right to attack me.  I do not deserve it.  You have no power to determine I do deserve any personal attack.  When the posts become bad posts it "could" be because we start talking bad about others instead of talking about the moves.  Anyone here has the freedom and the right to say what he wants about this or that move and you not liking it or you hating it does not equal you having authority to attack anyone or talk bad about him or her.

To castlerock and Smyslov:  

"What the story is depends on HOW you tell the story and your intentions with it".

No. My one hour with this thread is not a waste. I am able to produce a story. A story that is so surreal, Marques would have loved it. So here it is.

Chronicle of a Thread Fore Closed!

Guru starts a thread where in he replaces g4 instead of Bg5.

This starts a fairly decent discussion where in some conversional issues utlilising g4 came to light. This is despite the side track, whether a line without Bg5 Averbakh or not.

We are hardly in the sixth post and Bladez II makes and important revelation not known to chess fraternity. That the problem of Averbakh System is 6…c5 and produces a line in support of his claim! Let us see.

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.e4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.Be2 0–0 6.Bg5 c5

At this stage my ECO 2004 which has games till Nov 2003 has 2008 games! First indication of a line which has problem! Scores +884 – 499 = 598. 6...c5 is a problem for white says Bladez, not withstanding stats. The saga continues.

At this stage white has two choices 7.d5 and 7.dxc4. Both appear to be good. But only 7.d5 is discussed to question Averbakh. Every one is okay with this.

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.e4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.Be2 0–0 6.Bg5 c5 7.d5 h6 

At this stage my database has 785 games. +341 -190 =241

Here again there are two promising continuations. 8.Bf4 and 8.Be3. Bladez chooses 8.Bf4 and the forum agrees. Let us continue our saga.

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.e4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.Be2 0–0 6.Bg5 c5 7.d5 h6 8.Bf4 Qa5 

This is an important revelation. I have 430 games with 8.Bf4 and 22 (yes twenty two) games with 8...Qa5. That’s how critical the line championed by Bladez is.

Very strong Grandmasters have tried this move, in a bid to convert it to Benoni set up and realized that the resultant positions are murky and not worth venturing in. White has always scored well here but the resultant positions are unclear and hence they are not popular.

Here 9.Bd2 is more critical, because of the murky positions 9.Qd2 leads to, though white has excellent results. This line is unpopular because of 9.Bd2. This is not worth considering! So lets move on!

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.e4 Bg7 4.Nc3 d6 5.Be2 0–0 6.Bg5 c5 7.d5 h6 8.Bf4 Qa5 9.Qd2 e5 

e5? Is it e5?? Really e5??? This is the novelty! Grand Masters have tested 9...e6 here to steer the game to Benoni territory. It is not without reason. Centre is locked. White can keep the king in the center and black has no way of reaching it. White’s winning plan suggests itself. Next 10 or 15 moves for white is a no brainer. Be3,a4,Qd2,Bf1,Nge2,g4,h4,Ng3,Be2, Kf1,Kg2,Rh2, Rah1,g5, h5 sac,sac, mate!  It appears to me that black is already in perennial zugzwang!! I don’t have the stomach to analyse chess further.I’ll continue the story,but make it short.

So Bladez takes a tested and discarded line and produces a 12 move analysis. Fridz doesn’t understand strategies. Above discussion is a good example. But Fridz feels Bladez is right and I am wrong. He says he would have played the same move as Bladez.

Smyslov_Fan objects and furnishes analysis. He prefers 8.Bh4

Bladez produces a 13 move analysis with 8.Bh4 to say black is better and Fridz agrees.

Guru says it is Averbakh even if you don’t play Bg5. But by this time the thread is already fore closed.

Smyslov_Fan and Bladez resort to first round of bickering over Kasparov’s analysis.

TopNotch barges in with some very important games with 8.Bf4 and e6 instead of e5. And the thread reverts back to 8.Bf4!

Bladez repeats his original (?) analysis.

After insinuation from Smyslov_Fan, Bladez produces a 29 move wonder to say Black is excellently placed and Fridz agrees with whatever he has to say. End of page one.

TopNotch makes the same conclusion stated above. That this line is messy and black will do well not to enter.

Smyslov_Fan is in the middle of the tournament and takes time off to thank TopNotch.

Bladez changes the analysis and incorporates the novelty Nc6 for black and produces a 36 move analysis to say black is better and Fridz agrees. Here, however, Fridz turns a bit sleezy! It does not inform Bladez that unclear positions will also have to be numerically evaluated and it doesn’t mean anything!!

Second round of Bickering went on involving Smyslov_Fan, TopNotch, Castlerock, Bladez and his alter ego.

Smyslov_Fan produces Kasparov’s analysis and starts third round of bickering. Woofwoof joins in TopNotch drops out.

Bladez produces a new analysis of 33 moves, varying his own 15th move. As usual, Fridz agrees with Bladez.

Smyslov_Fan produces a game to counter Bladez. But a side track on Smyslov_Fan becoming a God starts. End of Page two.

In between this side track Bladez produces another 31 move analysis varying his own 17th move. And you guessed it right. Fridz agrees with him.

Finally, castlerock makes the grave blunder of deciding to study Averbakh in the weekend, thinks what is discussed is the critical line and makes a fool of himself and breaks his own record of foolishness by posting this.

Oh! Well!! As McWatt sings in Catch-22 What the hell !!

End of the Story.

Morals of the Story.

1. People who were involved in this thread after the first six posts are little dense. Fortunately they are a handful and the forum will survive.

2. Fridz does not understand strategy or unclear positions.

3. People who rely exclusively on Fridz will do well to study My System and Zurich International at the minimum. If they do, they will stop their exclusive reliance on frid to do their thinking!

Bladez,

Just do me a favour. Please post one single line which you consider to be the best for black. I tried going through the thread and I don't really make out which line I'm suppose to look in. One plain pgn please.

Good point,  castlerock! 

@Bladez,

Well done!

I completely missed that 18...Bc4 was possible because I thought 19.b4 was just winning.  I'm going to have to look at this a little more seriously since 18...Bc4 may indeed be good enough for a draw (I don't know for sure).  Of course, White has numerous good moves as early as move 13, but that's for another post.

@castlerock and woofwoof:

I'm trying! (you know how trying I am!)   But if I continue to combine responses in single postings, I may never get there! 8)

Quote:


Are you kidding? One or two days would be my guess

Woofwoof,

You're on to me!