Strategy_Rules wrote on 06/18/08 at 11:22:54:
Quote:Well since you ask, I will again put forward my often-expressed view that 3...f5 is downright unsound, and not because of 4.d3.
After analysing 3...f5 for a long time I must agree that the Schliemann is completely unsound. Sorry to all Schliemann-lovers
Well, thats just my view and I dont mind if you do not believe me
In my opinion: 4.Nc3 leads to a clear advantage for white, after 4.d3 fxe4 5.dxe4 Sf6 6.0-0 the best move is 6...d6, after 6...Bc5 black is very close to a lost position (by the way, not only the variation with Qd1-d3-c4 is strong ...

... )
The question why some very strong GMs failed to refute the Schliemann in their games against Radjabov can have many reasons.
Anyway, this does not mean that the Schliemann cannot be refuted (in the sense of clear advantage for white) of course.
The above was your post, which appears on page 3 of this thread, so far four pages in length. The thread itself is by no means focussed only on 6 ...d6, but only 4.d3. Your post is not exactly a request for info about 6...d6, and it mentions much else. So I don't think that anyone here was impolite to address various aspects of your remark that interested him, without addressing your particular interest in 6...d6.
You want the thread now to focus only on 6...d6
based on information that you are unwilling to share, and you seem to be offended that no one has followed.
I don't know about others here, but I am not interested in discussing this move at any length before I understand what's so bad about 6...Bc5, a much more ambitious move which, leaving aside any question of its ultimate merit, accords much better with the spirit of Black's system. I would not have posted at all to this thread if it's actual topic had been 6...d6.