please ban yourself.

tracke wrote on 07/24/08 at 20:16:28:



for the record I said no such thing! I was just examining a game and thought the great minds of the forum might correct me... not insinuate i'd state such awful things.  

I know it seems weird to place the rook so passively defending but then white is just up a healthy pawn... what can black do? It is clear though that his move Rg7+ is a forced draw.

Beetlejuice wrote on 07/24/08 at 20:31:09:



Yes I also wondered about 13. h4 though 13. Bxf5 seemed reasonable enough. It just felt like white had some major plus for awhile. At least thanks for taking my note seriouusly.

Jacob Aagaard wrote on 07/24/08 at 15:50:06:


Methinks not, more plausible is you tried it because like Tony and others you must have concluded after a closer look that it was a risk free way to play for the edge with the added bonus of being little known and studied. That's chess as Bibs says, its a move you played it, and why not.

As I mentioned earlier in this thread, there also a recent chessbase magazine article advocating the Ponziani, and  as far as surprise weapons go I would sooner punt this than the Centre game advovated in Dangerous Weapons 1.e4 e5.

We can continue to expect players to rehabilitate old and forgotten lines and openings, so long as the Marshall continues to prove such an effective drawing weapon.

Heaven forbid should the Petroff prove annoying enough we may have to abandon 1.e4 all together or even worse yet resort to, dare I say it, the King's Gambit which has the positive of avoiding the draw but the negative of handing black the full point.

Rule of thumb for annonymous and his many aliases, Focus a bit less on what the masters say and a bit more on what they play, and with that pearl of wisdom I'm outta here.

Sayonara,

Toppy

 

After all those ridiculous arguments from Aagaard that 8 Nd2 is just a random move and not important enough to include in the book, he goes and plays it himself. I have lost all respect for Jacob Aagaard! I thought Quality Chess was was a good chess book publishing company but I was wrong! I will not be buying any more of their products and I hope you do the same!

This is a message to everyone who disagrees with me on these posts! I am right and it is Marin, Aagaard, and Quality Chess who are wrong! If you can't see that by now, then you are an idiot!

trw wrote on 07/24/08 at 19:21:36:

Obviously Aagaard is not only a bad author and a lazy publisher
but also as player he lacks the winning technique.

tracke 

Jacob Aagaard wrote on 07/24/08 at 15:50:06:


anonymus help, help help 

we are dealing here with liars, cheaters, heavy criminals 

let us condemn them all to death sentence for forging 8.Nd2 and fooling us around 

oh my dear god, where is now my naj very best friend DRUG STALIN, surely you don't wanna know him aagaard, do you? 

I just thought it was a really funny thing to try out. I am Danish by birth and thus prone to irony. I am sorry if anyone missed the joke 

Bibs wrote on 07/24/08 at 15:16:10:


I rather suspect he played it just to tweak some noses here.