Huh? Craig, where were you? I already invented a counter to 9...c5 , in case you have not looked closely enough. It has been known since 1993 at least, but you did not look at it. Thus,
9...c5 10 Nxd4 cxd4 11 Bxf6 Bxf6 12 Ne4 Be7 13 Nxf6 gxf6 14 Qf3 Qe7 15 Qf6 Qf6 16 Rf6 e5 17 Rae1 Be6 18 Bh6 Rfe8 19 Rh7 Bd5 20 Re1 Rg8 21 Re5+ Be6 22 Bc4 Ke7 23 Rxe6+ Kd7 24 Rf7+ Kc8 25 Ree7 b6 26 Rc7+ Kb8 27 Rb7+ Kc8 28 Rfc7+ Kd8 29 Bg8 Ke8 30 Bd5, 1-0, Zilbermints - GeordiLaWoog, Internet Chess Club 3 0 rated blitz, 3/20/2003.
Zilbermints - Bolzoni ICC 3 0 rated blitz 19 March 2011
1 d4 d5 2 e4 dxe4 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 f3 ef3 5 Nxf3 e6 6 Bg5 Be7 7 Bd3 Nc6 8 00 Nxd4 9 Kh1 c5 10 Bxf6 Bxf6 11 Nxd4 Bxd4 12 Qh5 g6 13 Qh6 Bd7 14 Ne2 Bc6 15 Nd4 Qd4 16 Rf4 Qb2 17 Raf1 000 18 Rf7 Rxd3 19 Rf8+ Rxf8 20 Qxf8 Rd8 21 Qxc5 Qxa2 22 h3 Qd5 23 Qf2 a5 24 Re1 a4 25 Re3 Qc5 26 Qe2 Rd1+ 27 Kh2 Qd6+ 28 Rg3 Rd2 29 Qf1 a3 30 h4 Bxg2 31 Qc4+ Kb8 32 Qc3 Be4+ 33 Kg1 Qxg3+ 34 Qxg3+ Ka8 35 Qxa3 Kb8 36 Qf8+ Ka7 37 Qc5+ Kb8 38 Qe5+ Ka8 39 Qxe4 1-0.
Regarding your challenge, great! I should point out that on chess.com BDG tournament, you play 10 games at the same time against various opponents. The time limit is 1 move in 3 days. There is an elimination process, with the winners advancing to the next round. So, you will end up playing me, but I will also play against you with the Black pieces.
The BDG tournament is divided into sections arranged by ratings. My chess.com rating is currently 1679, so I am in the 1601-1800 section. For you to play me, I would suggest joining ASAP and started playing as many games as possible. That way you can get your rating to my level and face me in the same section. Otherwise, as per chess.com rules, you will end up playing in a different section.
I'm telling you like it is at chess.com, so you know what the deal is. I did not make these rules, chess.com did! I have no objection to playing you on chess.com, under the rules stated there.
With regard to "hope chess", you are missing a key point here, Craig. Chess is skill, endurance, art, science, and also luck. That's how it is. There is a little of everything in chess.
The Caltrop Coefficient does mean something, as Tim McGrew demonstrates in his article. It is the equivalent of chess psychology, perhaps. Why don't you tell McGrew your opinion about the Caltrop Coefficient? I'm sure you two would have a lively discussion! Also, let me point out that it was not I who brought the CC into our argument here, but another poster.
You just said that in the 9...c5 line, Black has to play more accurately. Which means that White has decent chances, as my earlier analyses, posted in the other thread, demonstrated. I also posted a couple of other games here, above.
I understand that you guys are looking for both sides playing the most perfect moves. That might work away from the pressures of the tournament hall, in the quiet of your cabinet. Then you can analyze ad infinitum, with result of a draw (assuming the best moves for White and Black). But, I ask, how many grandmasters caved in under pressure of a relentless attack? How many times various factors contributed to the defeat of a chess-player? A blind spot, forgotten analysis, a surprising new move, health problems, room temperature... All these factors can influence chess-players in choosing less-than-perfect moves! We are all human, and humans have weaknesses. These are the facts of everyday life.
Might I point out that the Fischer-Spassky and Topalov-Kramnik matches were full of many factors that influenced the games?
Perfection? I don't think so.
|