ChessPub Forum - New section just for the Najdorf?

(Moderators: Smyslov_Fan, GMTonyKosten)

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Poll

Question: Should the 1.e4 e5 section be split?


* This poll has now closed *
Absolutely! 2 (11.8%) Yes, it's worth the extra cost 3 (17.6%) Yes but not now 1 (5.9%) Don't mind/indifferent 3 (17.6%) Good idea but too expensive 1 (5.9%) No, if it ain't broke don't fix it 6 (35.3%) No way Jose! 1 (5.9%) Other sections should be split first 0 (0.0%) Total votes: 17 « Last Modified by: TN on: 06/19/10 at 00:31:03 »

Pages: 1 [2] 3

Topic Tools

New section just for the Najdorf? (Read 30838 times)

trw God Member Offline I Love ChessPublishing! Posts: 1414 Joined: 05/06/08 Gender:	Re: New section just for the Najdorf? Reply #24 - 06/18/10 at 03:29:20	Post Tools	Print Post
	Yes the Ruy Lopez and the Grunfeld definitely deserve their own sections long before another sicillian runoff section should ever come into play. If it came up that it costs more... I would definitely pay for the Ruy Lopez, might pay more for the Grunfeld... would never pay more for an extra sicillian run off.


	IP Logged

Göran Senior Member Offline ChessPublishing is great! Posts: 454 Location: Sweden Joined: 02/13/08 Gender:	Re: New section just for the Najdorf? Reply #23 - 06/17/10 at 22:55:58	Post Tools	Print Post
	GMTonyKosten wrote on 05/20/07 at 09:42:44: exigentsky wrote on 05/20/07 at 07:35:26: This doesn't mean that they wouldn't benefit and enjoy to have a separate section for the Najdorf. (just a place to discuss it in depth between other members) I could make a separate section for the Najdorf on the Forum, if there is enough demand?! Must admitt that it is not important at all to me. The Ruy Lopez on the other hand would be much appreciated if had a section of its own. Come on Tony - why should Ruy be a part of a huge "opening space". Each one deserves its own right and both historical and for the future Ruy Lopez is and will be import!

	What kind of proof is that?
	IP Logged

TN God Member Offline Posts: 3420 Joined: 11/07/08 Gender:	Re: Should the 1.e4 e5 section be split? Reply #22 - 06/17/10 at 22:21:13	Post Tools	Print Post
	This thread has been a bit quiet so I've added a quick poll. Disclaimer: Currently I'm not a subscriber to ChessPublishing. However, I intend to subscribe sometime in the next six months.

	All our dreams come true if we have the courage to pursue them.
	IP Logged

trw God Member Offline I Love ChessPublishing! Posts: 1414 Joined: 05/06/08 Gender:	Re: New section just for the Najdorf? Reply #21 - 06/17/10 at 17:19:39	Post Tools	Print Post
	TN wrote on 06/12/10 at 06:49:13: I'm thinking that splitting the 1.e4 e5 section into 'Ruy Lopez' and 'Open Games' might be a good idea, on the Forum and in the ChessPublishing monthly updates. What is your verdict? NOW THAT is an awesome idea and worth the additional $$$


	IP Logged

trw God Member Offline I Love ChessPublishing! Posts: 1414 Joined: 05/06/08 Gender:	Re: New section just for the Najdorf? Reply #20 - 06/17/10 at 17:18:37	Post Tools	Print Post
	increasing the subscription price over an opening like the Najdorf is a very bad idea!!


	IP Logged

GMTonyKosten YaBB Administrator Offline Mr Dynamic? Posts: 3181 Location: Clermont-Ferrand Joined: 12/19/02 Gender:	Re: New section just for the Najdorf? Reply #19 - 06/15/10 at 13:52:25	Post Tools	Print Post
	OrangeCounty wrote on 06/09/10 at 16:46:14: The Najdorf doesn't have its own section because the whole Taimanov/Classical/Scheveningen/Najdorf complex is transpositional, while for the most part the Dragon is not transpositional. That's a very good point! I think that the way theory is growing, and the number of important games increasing, there will never be enough coverage. Splitting the sections further would cause enormous technical problems, would need lots of extra writers, and would obviously be very expensive. Therefore to seriously consider this we would also have to seriously look at increasing the subscription. On the other hand, adding extra Forum sections would be simple enough, providing one of the Moderators was happy to trawl through all the threads and move them to their new home.


	WWW Facebook Twitter IP Logged

Göran Senior Member Offline ChessPublishing is great! Posts: 454 Location: Sweden Joined: 02/13/08 Gender:	Re: New section just for the Najdorf? Reply #18 - 06/12/10 at 09:57:48	Post Tools	Print Post
	That is an excellent idea. I think GM Victor Mikhalevski is doing an excellent job but it is in its nature that Spanish is such an important opening that the other opening will be in the background when piled all together. I even should wish that Ruy and Petroff had there own section and then a new one with all other 1.e4 e5 openings.

	What kind of proof is that?
	IP Logged

TN God Member Offline Posts: 3420 Joined: 11/07/08 Gender:	Re: New section just for the Najdorf? Reply #17 - 06/12/10 at 06:49:13	Post Tools	Print Post
	I'm thinking that splitting the 1.e4 e5 section into 'Ruy Lopez' and 'Open Games' might be a good idea, on the Forum and in the ChessPublishing monthly updates. What is your verdict?

	All our dreams come true if we have the courage to pursue them.
	IP Logged

Lou_Cyber Full Member Offline "I didn´t understand that. It must be true." Posts: 237 Location: Rendsburg Joined: 01/28/05 Gender:	Re: New section just for the Najdorf? Reply #16 - 06/11/10 at 16:43:33	Post Tools	Print Post
	Transpositions will always be a problem, even under the existing sections. Imo the "Open Sicilian" (and the "1.e4 e5") section are too big for monthly updates. Minor openings have a difficult time to get attention of the writers. I wouldn´t mind two additional sections, e.g. "Open Sicilians - Najdorf, Scheveningen, Taimanov" and "Open Sicilians - all the rest" on the one hand and "1.e4 e5 "Ruy Lopez and Russian" and "1.e4 e5 - all the rest", just to get more focus on the KG, Philidor and other openings, which get a more attention in the forum than in the sections - which indicates that there is a market for these openings.

	If you try, you may lose. If you don´t try, you have lost.
	IP Logged

OrangeCounty Full Member Offline You played that like it was a good move! Posts: 171 Joined: 05/26/10	Re: New section just for the Najdorf? Reply #15 - 06/09/10 at 16:46:14	Post Tools	Print Post
	The Najdorf doesn't have its own section because the whole Taimanov/Classical/Scheveningen/Najdorf complex is transpositional, while for the most part the Dragon is not transpositional. Trying to discuss the Najdorf without tripping on the Scheveningen or the Boleslavsky is difficult enough anytime, but currently the fashionable response to all these openings is the same: Be3,f3, Qd2, 0-0-0. And despite appearances, you don't transpose ot the Yugoslav Attack despite the similar plan.


	IP Logged

thibdb13 God Member Offline Tal was the best Posts: 974 Location: Mechelen Joined: 01/25/07 Gender:	Re: New section just for the Najdorf? Reply #14 - 08/12/07 at 18:41:05	Post Tools	Print Post
	exigentsky wrote on 05/20/07 at 19:18:40: That would be hard to determine, maybe we need a poll. Yes, this is a good idea.

	Yusupov once said that “The problem with the Dutch Defence is that later in many positions the best move would be ...f5-f7” but he is surely wrong.
	IP Logged

hennie286 YaBB Newbies Offline I Love ChessPublishing! Posts: 12 Joined: 04/05/07	Re: New section just for the Najdorf? Reply #13 - 07/04/07 at 11:10:42	Post Tools	Print Post
	Well, is it also possible to get a seperate forum for just the English attack !?? I don't like the typical plans of white (f3, g4 h4 etc, simple and very effective), when I'm playing black. Need more info about that stuff ( I have bought Kasparov's DVD3 about the Najdorf now)....Maybe the hyper-acc dragon is a better try then . Therefore a Najdorf forum is necessary !!!


	IP Logged

Bibs God Member Offline Posts: 2342 Joined: 10/24/06	Re: New section just for the Najdorf? Reply #12 - 06/06/07 at 15:25:07	Post Tools	Print Post
	Yes, good idea to have Najdorf as seprate forum. Judge popularity from that and consider whether worthwhile to have separate section. Would have thought so myself but that's impressionistic rather than empirical. Guess someone who has chessbase (I dont) can find numbers of games, also check numbers of posts relative to Other Sicilians, and amount of action within each thread. Note that dragon has died down recently by the way on the forum. Not necessarily sympathy regarding Chris' occasional tardiness, but guess it must be tough for him finding enough relevant games each month in only one line? Agree that Grunfeld placed in Daring Defences looks peculiar. Is as solid as they come.


	IP Logged

Willempie God Member Offline I love ChessPublishing .com! Posts: 4312 Location: Holland Joined: 01/07/05	Re: New section just for the Najdorf? Reply #11 - 05/30/07 at 15:19:10	Post Tools	Print Post
	Well the Najdorf is kind of a chameleon (esp if followed up with e6), so a seperate section may not be such a good idea.

	If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through.
	IP Logged

nyoke God Member Offline I Love ChessPublishing! Posts: 593 Location: BELGIUM Joined: 12/31/06 Gender:	Re: New section just for the Najdorf? Reply #10 - 05/30/07 at 12:01:28	Post Tools	Print Post
	And what with hybrids (such as the dragadorf) ?


	IP Logged

Pages: 1 [2] 3

Topic Tools

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Bookmarks: