Anonymous 3 suggestion no 3
(to move 1.e4 ... to the section Daring Defences) has the problem,
that the Caro-Kann would be in the section
"Daring Defences". His other suggestions look very sensible.

Anonymous3 wrote on 07/30/11 at 21:23:08:



I never thought I'd write this (along with 'England are a very good cricket team'), but I rather agree with A3.

1 and 2 definitely. Or was it just set up this way to support Chris until his dancing took off? Fair enough if so.
3 could do.
4 and 5 make sense.

A real mishmash as it stands.

Yeah, Tony, merging the two sections in Chess Publishing General does make sense.

As for merging other forums, the trend has been to create more sections, not less. I'm not sure that people will be happy with fewer sections, and I haven't experienced any serious problems with the sections as they are now.

The King's Indian section seems to be about the least popular section (not based on any empirical evidence), but I don't recommend combining it with other sections.

I think it is time for a reorganization and renaming of the Chesspublishing sections. Here are my suggestions:


1) There is no need for a separate "Dragons" section so this section should be moved to the Open Sicilian section. Also, enough theory has developed to where it going to get harder and harder to come up with new ideas just in the dragon sicilians.

2) The King's indian, Grunfeld, Benoni, and Benko Gambit should be in the same section. This is because the main line of the Four Pawns Attack in the King's indian is a Benoni line, some Grunfled players will want to meet the Fianchetto variation with the King's Indian and vise versa, and many attacking players play both the King's Indian and Grunfeld or both the Benoni and Benko (Kasparov and Fischer, for example, played the King's indian, Grunfeld, and Modern Benoni) and right now these openings are in 3 different sections!

3) The "1...e4" and "Daring Defenses" should be in the same section. If you move the Grunfeld and Benko Gambit, the "Daring Defenses" would be losing 2 of its main openings (and the main one in the Grinfeld) and probalby wouldn't have enough popular openings to remain an independent section. Also, some players meet both 1.e4 and 1.d4 with 1...g6 or 1...d6 and now all of this would be covered in the same section. I'm not sure what this section should be called. Any ideas?

4) "1 d4 d5" needs to be remaned "Queen's Gambit" because "1 d4 d5" makes it seem like everything after "1 d4 d5" is covered in this section.

5) The "d-pawn specials" needs to be renamed "Queen's Pawn Games" as this is the name for these openings.   

If you take my suggestions, this would cut down chesspub. to 10 sections. However, then you wouldn't have to worry about making sure you have 12 authors (and this makes a better chance you wouldn't have to do a section yourself GM Tony Kosten!), paying 12 authors, and worring about 12 authors getting their updates in on time.