Ahem, well I suppose there are different possible interpretations of the term "sound". Still, I'd like to point out that tossing material with wild abandon and weakening one's own position are not the only ways of taking one's opponent "out of the book"...

Does anything sound ever strike your fancy?

[quote author=TopNotch link=1154517513/30#41 date=1158957455] a strategic plan can only work if tactical nuances are taken into account.    
[/quote]

I would be very hard-pressed to come up with any game examples which contadict this. Nor do I feel any desire to. All I was saying is that since I do not strive to win games with tactical blows, the few that I do manage to control from beginning to end bring me some satisfaction. But then again, I know players who are greatly satisfied when they come up with successful swindles (this is what I call cheap, but everyone is free to disagree).
Yes MNb, it's all a matter of style. That's why we have no advice to offer each other.

                                                                                            Looking forward to agreeing with you again sometime,
                                                                                                                                                     Hubert

Uberdecker wrote on 09/21/06 at 22:53:58:



Uberdecker wrote on 09/22/06 at 10:47:58:


Uber......do not expect to toss in an insult and then expect the matter to be dropped.

You opened the door to your failings as you call them, and I tried to help you, I had no idea that you felt insulted by my post or that I was spouting cliches.

Moreover I got the feeling that you were actually proud of your tactical disdain, despite the fact that it is virtually impossible to succeed in chess without proficiency in this area. If this knowledge is cliche, then you would not refer to tactics as cheap tricks, you would understand that a strategic plan can only work if tactical nuances are taken into account.    

I would love to see these 'strategic' masterpieces where you manage to outplay grandmasters without having to employ a tactical stroke.

Toppy

Ah, my dear MNb, never miss a chance to step in with your two left feet. As you recognise yourself, you have nothing but [i]clichés [/i]to add to this discussion.
I must say that you and TopNotch lack a certain [i]savoir-vivre[/i]. I am probably the only regular contributor who provides unprompted insight into his own chess failings, and you find nothing better than to pounce upon the opportunity to patronize and offer common-place advice. Compared to this, tactics are indeed not cheap at all.
Let's drop it shall we? And return, if need be, to the comparison between various lines against the Garb.

Well, it depends on what you mean by "strong". My results are very inconsistant and I can miss mate in one against anybody, but from time to time I get the satisfaction of beating a GM by conducting a strategically rich and complete game, not just thx to some cheap tactic
Thank you for your solicitude, but I am just too stuborn to mend my ways.
Anyway, enough about me. I fully understand Markovitch's irritation at my previous posts. Failing to take into account the erratic aspect of the chess struggle leads to an unrealistic view of things.
But of course, I maintain all comments pertaining specifically to the Garb.

[quote author=Markovich link=1154517513/30#31 date=1158678077]
"The clearest win will arise from gradually increasing the pressure," I never heard such high-flown nonsense.  What, until some exasperated kibitzer reaches out and plays the killing stroke for you?
[/quote]

To be perfectly honest, I must admit that this happens to me on occasion. Yes, it is an "inherent flaw" in my own "chess character" to despise tactical solutions and to refuse to look for them. I am even loath to employ them when I happen to spot them by chance.

All this has an influence on what I post. I have indeed made some rather ludicrous generalisations here, but please keep in mind in the future that it is all -at least in part- tongue in cheek. I recognise chess as a fantastically complex game, the subtleties of which are unbelievably difficult to grasp.
I certainly do not equate positional understanding  to a list of unbreakable rules. Intuition is my main guide-line, for better or worse.
Sorry for boring you all.

                                                                           Best regards,
                                                                                    UD

[quote author=Uberdeker link=1154517513/30#32 date=1158681973][quote author=Markovich link=1154517513/30#31 date=1158678077]
Absolute baloney.  E.g. positions where Nd5! hanging the knight to an e6 pawn, is the right move against the Hedgehog or the Sicilian [/quote]

In such a line as 1. e4 c5 ; 2. Ktf3 a6?! ; 3. c4 Ktc6 ; 4. d4 cd ; 4. Ktxd4 Ktf6 ; 5. Ktc3 e6 ; 6. Be2 d6 ; 7. 0-0 Be7 ; 8. Be3 Qc7 ; 9. Rc1 0-0?! the answer 10. Ktd5! is designed to achieve positional goals even though it does rely upon a very simple tactic.

[quote] positions where White has pawns on d4 and e4, Black has one on e6 and a Knight on f6, and the right move is d4, following up exd4 with e4-e5 and a kingside attack with pieces[/quote]

I doubt anyone can make any sense of this sentence. Perhaps you should try writing it in latin.

[quote]
(for that matter, practically any situation that calls for kingside attack with pieces); many postions where one side has the advantage but castling is on opposite sides; and a bizillion other positions, call for radical solutions.
[/quote]

In my opinion such attacks require a well thought-out strategy, more than calculating skills, but of course, I never asserted that one can avoid tactics altogether. I refer you to my previous posts, in the hope that no more space will be wasted here.

[quote]
"The clearest win will arise from gradually increasing the pressure," I never heard such high-flown nonsense.  What, until some exasperated kibitzer reaches out and plays the killing stroke for you?
[/quote]

I ask you to review your tone in future posts. Not only is such rudeness uncalled for, it is simply ridiculous to get so over-heated about the Garb.  2. ...Bxg4/3. ...dc gives White a material advantage to hang on to while after 2. ...Ktc6 or 2. ...c6 all he can do is lie down and wait for Black to slowly finish him off. That is all that is to be said here.

                                                                         Best regards,
                                                                               Hubert
[/quote]


I am sorry if I give offense, but baloney is baloney in any language.  "The clearest win will arise from gradually increasing the pressure" falsely characterizes how many chess games are won.

Nor, in anyone's common use of this or any other language, are the sharp and radical solutions that often appear in good play called "gradually increasing the pressure."

The remark I criticize wasn't made about the Grob. 

I'll review my posts for their tone; I suggest you review yours for what sense they make.