[quote author=7F7C7670110 link=1298835491/50#50 date=1349431596]Bibs #29 and GabrielGale #47 – great posts. Bewildering to me that quarrels (which, as here, are usually over something utterly pettifogging) can get to this pass. Thread-pruning surely long overdue. Do moderators, or feuders, ever stop to consider what thoughts this puerile stuff could be provoking among chessplayers at large? (As in: ‘If this is the famous ChessPublishing, maybe I won’t bother.’)[/quote]

Moderator hat...ON.

Fair point re: pruning and moderating. 
Prefer a light, whimsical touch, but have to get out the shears if there is any more arguing. Any more bickering and the whole Paulsen-TNich "It's pretty equal"/"no, it's a draw" nonsense will be deleted wholesale. 
No more attacks from either please. Many here can't be bothered with the playground stuff. Thanks both of you.

Some chess analysis has broken out (particular thanks to GabrielGale), yeah, let's see some moves people. 
Enjoy your chess, and have a jolly weekend there you good people.

I was just thinking that 9.Bf4 might be a better try for an edge than 9.Be3, but Jangjava thinks Black has completely equalised after 9...Bd7.

@BPaulsen

I agree on both counts.

For those who has been following this mind-numbing exchange would have been happy to see some concrete moves on the Forum. To help those who are not as good at visualising, here it is in glorious replayable format up to and including TN's post at 13:27:14 (not including BPaulsen's reply.

Let's have more concrete moves and analysis and less talk, perhaps?

You call a position on move 9 a draw and I'm trolling:) Are you familiar with doublespeak?
'harp on utterly fallacious' 
That's poetry man!
The day we have tablebases that cover the position on move 9 is the day you can climb to the top of the tallest hill and scream DRAW!
Until then 
I hope that this post isn't too long for you and you read the whole thing.
By the way, Did you resign after 10.Bf4 or are you still thinking?

TNich wrote on 10/05/12 at 02:51:00:


Actually, they do. A significant number of opening variations are analyzed out to endgames that are in tablebases. Lasker's Defense of the QGD is one dominant example.

Quote:


Oh look, back to the "you're only listening to the engine" line of logic that I disabused previously. Your ability to harp on utterly fallacious points is mind-numbing.

9...Ng4 10.Bf4 is all you've got? Wow, great analysis. Way to prove me wrong.

Heh... You did a good job trolling me. Now I know not to take you seriously.

BPaulsen wrote on 10/05/12 at 01:27:40:


I rather like this 9...Ng4 move, but I'm not convinced that 9.Be3 Ng4 10.Qxd8 Rxd8 11.Bxc5 Be6 12.Rfd1 Bxc4 13.Nd2 Ba6 14.Bxc6 bxc6 15.Nb3 is dead equal. It's still a draw, of course, but White has the better placed knight and bishop, so Black would be the side playing for the draw. Obviously in this Tasic-Marculescu game Black should have played ...Bxc3, but the opposite coloured bishops give White the meagre chances that are in the position as his pieces are a bit more active.

10.Bf4 is another idea, but after 10...Nd4 I'd be very happy playing Black.

Bibs wrote on 10/04/12 at 13:09:43:


Over the board just about everything qualifies as a winning try to due the emphasis on the human element. It's not really an argument. 
 
I'm being provocative, but I'm looking to be proven wrong. There is a very obvious, self-serving reason for wanting to be wrong about this position.

Now, back to proving the draw.

Looking at Stefan's analysis has convinced me of one thing. I could lose the position from either side:)