Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar (Read 37330 times)
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2513
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #30 - 01/19/14 at 12:37:50
Post Tools
RdC wrote on 01/19/14 at 11:48:13:
motörhead wrote on 01/18/14 at 00:26:57:
Without that knight the Bc8 is always free for action down to g4 which makes it much more difficult for white to generate action on the king's side.


Playing the position without knowing it was either a long-Bogo or a reverse Albin, playing 9. .. Bg4 followed by 10. .. Nbd7 seemed logical. This could then enable b5 to be played even as a sacrifice.


I'm sure that's not a bad idea, either.  But I'd suspect that most BDG players would be happy with their compensation here, perhaps we'll hear from some (I'm not one).
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2513
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #29 - 01/19/14 at 12:35:54
Post Tools
Motörhead, I understand the points you're making about tempi, etc.  Believe me, I do, and I've read Dvoretsky's articles about positions in reverse, and I remember specific examples from the King's Indian Attack where he basically concluded that White had no genuinely useful way of using his extra tempo and suggested that White should just play  something like Kh1!?

But I really think that you're overthinking things here.  It reminds me of Bruce Lee, who said: ""Before I learned the art, a punch was just a punch, and a kick, just a kick.  After I learned the art, a punch was no longer a punch, a kick, no longer a kick.  Now that I understand the art, a punch is just a punch and a kick is just a kick."

It's clear that in this position the tempo is useful for White.  Does that mean that Black's position is indefensible?  Of course not.  But without spending hours and hours of analysis, it looks like full compensation to me, along the lines of those similar positions I posted about earlier.  And the original point I wanted to get across is that this isn't a simple, practical way of avoiding what White wants: it's very normal/typical attacking, gambit play from White, and I think that any BDG player will be comfortable in these lines.

I'm not familiar with Scheerer's work, but I understand that his lines were not necessarily what you thought was best play.

By the way, after your proposed 10.Be2 b5, I'll just play in the center with 11.Ne5 and ask what you're doing on the wing.  White has a very large advantage in development here and ideas of Ne5-c6 as well as d5-d6.  This certainly looks like "full compensation" to me, and I think that Black deserves better when facing the Blackmar-Diemer, both from theoretically and practically.

For instance 10.Be2 b5 11.Ne5 Bb7 12.Bf3 and with Rhe1 coming, I'm starting to prefer White.  If 11...Qa5 12.Qe3 hits the c-pawn and again I'm starting to like White.  And I don't really think that 11...b4 12.Na4 helps Black's cause.

But I don't want to spend any more time defending the BDG, I think I've made my point a number of times.  If Black wants to play this way he certainly can, and he still has an extra pawn.  I just don't think that he should expect an easy life.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 866
Joined: 05/17/08
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #28 - 01/19/14 at 11:48:13
Post Tools
motörhead wrote on 01/18/14 at 00:26:57:
Without that knight the Bc8 is always free for action down to g4 which makes it much more difficult for white to generate action on the king's side.


Playing the position without knowing it was either a long-Bogo or a reverse Albin, playing 9. .. Bg4 followed by 10. .. Nbd7 seemed logical. This could then enable b5 to be played even as a sacrifice.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
motörhead
Full Member
***
Offline


Here comes the bass, thunder
in the guts...

Posts: 226
Joined: 10/09/08
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #27 - 01/18/14 at 22:15:44
Post Tools
ErictheRed wrote on 01/18/14 at 15:24:05:
I agree that 10...Nc6 looks better.  But I don't think I would rush with the d5-d6 push as White, anyway: maybe just 10.Be2 to complete development and trusting in the compensation.  If 10...Nd7 11.d6 should gain in strength, and if some other move I'll probably go 11.Ne5 intending Bf3 and Rhe1, because you no longer have the annoying ...Nh5 response (for instance, 10.Ne5 Nh5!).

I mean we could go back and forth like this all day, but White has compensation here.  Is he better?  Probably not.  Is the extra tempo useful?  Very much so.


Well, yes of course we should go back and forth like this. As we should be able to define the compensation somehow beyond mystic words, Or are we just romatically diemeresque?
Please remember that I referred to Scheerer's book, which is the most up-to-date source by now, and there, besides the bright words about the possible future of this variation, the standard of research to the topic is quite low, in my eyes.
As said he gave 10.d6"!"
To quote myself: "I don't think that white should push d5-d6 too early."
To quote you: "I don't think I would rush with the d5-d6 push as White."
So we both agree on this.
And my finding on 10... Nc6 etc as given is in clear contradiction to the book, where white's play rises to unjustified power as 13... Ne4! is not topic there.
So there is a must to go back and forth to find the thin line to best white play.

Btw 1:
Stefan Bücker gave "10.Bh6!" saying that the tempo plus should result in some benefit in those sharp attacking schemes. But one move is no analysis.
The question remains how white should get things going on the king's side as long as the Bc8 ranges down to g4. And I'm not sure that black is willing to obstruct it deliberately with Nbd7, as he has b7-b5 asf at hand - and that is a result of white's early castling long: giving targets to go for.

Exactly there begins the discussion of the virtue of being a tempo up. Just counting tempi does not meet the point. No side is forced to just follow common ways (well trodden paths) but can adept the play to the exact situation and information.
There is the german off beat-theoretican/nerd Rainer Schlenker who invented the term "reflex theorem" (see Keilhack "Die Tarrasch-Verteidigung"). He says that chess is a game of information and having recived a certain information will influence your play, your reflex on the very situation. In the very case: Having white's king castled long and seeing an attack coming on the king's side, black will surley refuse to play sth like Nbd7 but head for aggressive measures on his own against the given target.
I confer to another topic to make my argument clear: Just take the classical king's indian (E97etc.) and you know about the typical attacks of black's on the king's side.
And now take the exact variation in the king's indian attack. There the classical approach by black (c5/d5/e5, Nc6, Nf6, Be7) will naturally result in positions where black is a tempo down to the normal KID. And, given that black plays it best way, we can define this missing tempo on the black side: He misses 0-0.
And that completely changes the whole picture as now any avalanche of white's on the king's side (as is usual in the highly theoretical colours reversed version) will have no target there.
In other words: just counting tempi and forgeting about given informations will fail.
On your 10.Be2 (I had that too and I'm not sure about it), black can go for 10...b5 with b5-b4 in mind as the B occupies a possible retreat for the Nc3 (but there is a4 available, but then black may think about Ne4... I havn't done much on it).

Btw 2:
The idea of snatching the c5 pawn in the variation 10... exd6 11.Bxd6 Re8 was not mine. It was given in a somehow obscure way by Scheerer, and there was Bücker in Kaissiber who pointed out the fact, that white may catch the pawn c5 as there is no protecting N on d7 yet.
But that is of lesser importance. After all as black I wouldn't go for the cooperative 10... exd6 as 10...Nc6 is more to the point.
  

A walk trough the ocean of most souls would scarcely get your feet wet.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2513
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #26 - 01/18/14 at 15:24:05
Post Tools
motörhead wrote on 01/18/14 at 00:26:57:
It was pointed out here earlier that the whole Long Bogo thing is nothing but an Albin's Counter gambit reversed, and so a tempo up. I first read this interesting fact in Stefan Bücker's Kaissiber back in 1998.

But I think this tempo up gives problems - for white. As this very tempo is the missing Nb8-d7 (which as Nb1-d2 is regularly played by white in comparable Albin CG positions). Without that knight the Bc8 is allways free for action down to g4 which makes it much more difficult for white to generate action on the king's side.

It may just seem a paradox: Is the tempo plus a minus?


No, the tempo plus is certainly a plus, you're overthinking things.  Look at the position I embedded in my previous post.  In that, if Black had the additional move X...0-0-0 played it would transpose to a "Long Bogo" (with colors reversed), and it's silly to think that castling queenside is somehow undesirable.  For one, in the Albin White has the nice shot 9.Qb3 0-0-0 10.Ne5!.  Reversed and with an extra tempo for the gambiteer, Black has nothing like this.  Tempi are important, especially in opposite-side castle positions where one (or both) sides are playing for mate.

motörhead wrote on 01/18/14 at 00:26:57:
Firstly, I don't think white has much after simply 10... exd6 11.Bxd6 Re8 as after 12.Bxc5 some major exchanges may take place and white is not clearly ahead in development.


Why are you taking a pawn?  12.Bc4! and I prefer White; he has the d5-square and a weakened f7-pawn to target. 


motörhead wrote on 01/18/14 at 00:26:57:
But secondly, black too has the natural 10... Sc6...


I agree that 10...Nc6 looks better.  But I don't think I would rush with the d5-d6 push as White, anyway: maybe just 10.Be2 to complete development and trusting in the compensation.  If 10...Nd7 11.d6 should gain in strength, and if some other move I'll probably go 11.Ne5 intending Bf3 and Rhe1, because you no longer have the annoying ...Nh5 response (for instance, 10.Ne5 Nh5!).

I mean we could go back and forth like this all day, but White has compensation here.  Is he better?  Probably not.  Is the extra tempo useful?  Very much so.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
motörhead
Full Member
***
Offline


Here comes the bass, thunder
in the guts...

Posts: 226
Joined: 10/09/08
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #25 - 01/18/14 at 00:26:57
Post Tools
SWJediknight wrote on 01/14/14 at 11:06:42:
One issue is the so-called "Long Bogo" line, 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 g6 6.Bf4 Bg7 7.Qd2 0-0 8.0-0-0 c5 9.d5 a6, which is met by 10.d6 with good play for White (as pointed out by Scheerer, which is why White should put the bishop on f4, not e3 or g5).


I seem to be too weak a player as I really do not understand the whole Long-Bogo thing.
Neither can I see too many differences in whether to place the dark squared bishop of white on f4 or g5 (there are cases, where the bishop is better placed on g5 to give power to d5-d6) nor can I see the virtues of that d5-d6 advance in the so called Long Bogo.
Indeed, Scheerer gives 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 g6 6.Bf4 Bg7 7.Qd2 0-0 8.0-0-0 c5 9.d5 a6 and now he attaches an exclamation mark to 10.d6 referring to Rajmund Emanuel (whose homepage sadly vanished in the internet). But why? What the hec is so strong here?

Firstly, I don't think white has much after simply 10... exd6 11.Bxd6 Re8 as after 12.Bxc5 some major exchanges may take place and white is not clearly ahead in development.

But secondly, black too has the natural 10... Sc6 as given by Scheerer (and as allowed by the removal of control on c6 by d5-d6). Now Scheerer gives a quite interesting game with nice tactics beginning with the sequence 11.Qe3 exd6 12.Bxd6 Re8 13.Qxc5 now saying something mystifiing about active white pieces and proceeding with 13... Be6 14.Ng5 asf.
But I can't see the profits of white's action here. He played the time consuming push d4-d5-d6 and then the time consuming Dd1-d2-e3xc5 just to win back the pawn he sacrificed courageously on move 4 - five tempi for that.

And in my eyes there is an omission in Scheerer's book that reduces the relevance of the given game nearly to zero: I don't see the deeper sense in 13... Be6.
Why not directly 13... Ne4! hitting Qc5, Bd6 and Nc3? 14.Nxe4 seems forced and now after 14... Rxe4 black is the one with the truely active pieces. Esp. as there is no effective discovery attack on Qd8 by white's Bd6. Infact the black pieces are well orientated towards white's king. The strong Bg7 hits b2 and may perhaps be supported by a rook swing to b4.
When there is someone who has attacking prospects, it is surely black who has the half open c-file and may advance his queen side pawns.

And what on the other hand are the prospects of the attacker in the first degree, the BD-Gambiteer? He's doomed to defend against a naging initiative of black's.

I don't think that white should push d5-d6 too early. The argument, that it may catch the pawn c5 undefended is weak.
I'm not even sure that white should play 8.0-0-0 at such an early stage as this makes it clear very early, where black may find a target.

It was pointed out here earlier that the whole Long Bogo thing is nothing but an Albin's Counter gambit reversed, and so a tempo up. I first read this interesting fact in Stefan Bücker's Kaissiber back in 1998.

But I think this tempo up gives problems - for white. As this very tempo is the missing Nb8-d7 (which as Nb1-d2 is regularly played by white in comparable Albin CG positions). Without that knight the Bc8 is allways free for action down to g4 which makes it much more difficult for white to generate action on the king's side.

It may just seem a paradox: Is the tempo plus a minus?

(As allways this was done with a wooden board before my head - so sorry if I overlooked something Wink)
  

A walk trough the ocean of most souls would scarcely get your feet wet.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2513
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #24 - 01/14/14 at 14:23:52
Post Tools
Yuck, despite the extra pawn, that "Long Bogo" line does not look like something I'd want to play as Black.  Surely that's the kind of hacking play White wants when he gambits a pawn on the second move?  I also don't really see a way to avoid transposing to regular ...g6 lines after 4...c5, so I don't think that you're taking BDG players out of their comfort zone or anything.

Anyway regarding earlier comments, playing ...c5 and ...g6 is certainly nothing like a Benoni or Sicilian in this position.  It's exactly an Albin reversed where White has an extra tempo, though admittedly it's an extra tempo in a line that isn't considered best for Black in the Albin.  Still, the extra tempo should count for something, right?  So I'd think this is more-or-less as good for White as the Albin is for Black. 

The position is also a bit like various d-pawn openings where one side pushes their d-pawn to Q5.  Of course it's not an IQP position because White still has a pawn on c2, but some of the play will be fairly similar to various IQP lines like 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 c5 4. cxd5 exd5 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. g3 Nf6 7. Bg2 Be7 8. O-O O-O 9. dxc5 d4 10. Na4, though here Black has sacrificed a different pawn than White in the BDG.

Or maybe the Winawer Counter Gambit, 1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nc3 e5 4. dxe5 d4 5. Ne4. 

It's also vaguely similar to 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 c5 4. g3 cxd4 5. Nxd4 d5 6. Bg2 e5 7. Nc2 d4 with reversed colors.  In all of these lines Black has purposely played to get his pawn to Q5, it's not a disadvantage for him.

But really it's just an Albin in reverse with an extra move for the gambiteer. Look:

White scores 65% in my database from this position, but if we gave Black an extra move like you're doing, that score would likely become much more respectable, and I'd think the evaluation would go from marginally unsound pawn sacrifice to "full compensation." 

I'm sure Black's OK and you can make this your pet defense if you'd like, but just looking at that "Long Bogo" line for instance, I'd want nothing to do with the Black pieces.  For what it's worth, I think I'd prefer White in that Long Bogo to Black in the Tarrasch with 9...d4, and the 9...d4 Tarrasch is (was?) a fairly well-regarded pawn sacrifice, which I've even played for Black so I'm not biased against it.

Play it if you want, but it looks dangerous to me.  I think there are easier ways to avoid getting hacked to death by a gambit specialist, i.e. don't give him an obvious plan of castling queenside, marching his h-pawn down the board, and sac, sac, mate. 
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 866
Joined: 05/17/08
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #23 - 01/14/14 at 11:52:01
Post Tools
SWJediknight wrote on 01/14/14 at 11:06:42:
One issue is the so-called "Long Bogo" line, 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 g6 6.Bf4 Bg7 7.Qd2 0-0 8.0-0-0 c5 9.d5 a6,


Oddly enough, that was exactly how my recent game transposed. The possibility of d6 did vaguely bother me, so I played 9. .. Bg4 rather than 9. .. a6 intending the concession of ceding the Bishop pair to eliminate the potentially dangerous Nf3.

On a database search of conventional OTB sources, there aren't any practical examples of  the "Long Bogo".

For another view, I found this with Google "blackmar diemer long bogo"
http://blackmardiemergambit.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/Rare%20BDG%20lines
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
SWJediknight
God Member
*****
Offline


Alert... opponent out
of book!

Posts: 902
Joined: 03/14/08
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #22 - 01/14/14 at 11:06:42
Post Tools
One issue is the so-called "Long Bogo" line, 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 g6 6.Bf4 Bg7 7.Qd2 0-0 8.0-0-0 c5 9.d5 a6, which is met by 10.d6 with good play for White (as pointed out by Scheerer, which is why White should put the bishop on f4, not e3 or g5).  If Black plays 4...c5 or 5...c5 and follows up with a kingside fianchetto, Black has to be careful of the potential transposition.

I think if Black wants a kingside fianchetto then 4...exf3 5.Nxf3 g6 is more critical (indeed, I'm not sure that it is any less critical than 5...c6 or 5...Bf5), since in the "Long Bogo" Black has a few more critical options, such as 8...Bf5, and 8...a5!? causing immediate disruption in the white queenside (suggested to me earlier by MNb, by extension of an article by Abby Marshall which recommended ...a5 against Be3).  The line with 6.Bc4 Bg7 7.0-0 0-0 8.Qe1 is dangerous if Black doesn't know what to do, but 8...Nc6 9.Qh4 Bg4 leads to advantage for Black.

3...e5 is fully playable but the snag is that it gives White a choice between near-prospectless equality with 4.dxe5, and trying to unbalance the position with 4.Nxe4 or 4.Nge2.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 866
Joined: 05/17/08
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #21 - 01/14/14 at 10:28:03
Post Tools
Gambit wrote on 01/14/14 at 10:10:58:
But I should warn you, RdC, that there are many books showing how to play against 4...c5 and 5...c5 .


There are books showing, or purporting to show, how to play against almost every opening. But if they are just database dumps and computer analysis, there's no particular reason to prefer their opinions over private analysis of what has and hasn't been played in practice.

What's marginally scary about main lines of the BDG is the way that the absence of the f pawn allows White to build an attack. So assume you take the pawn with gxf3 and White recaptures with the Knight. Then one obvious idea is Bg4, whereupon White may play h3, you take, they take with the Queen and you play c6. What then can happen is that White can triple on the f file. If alternatively you play g6, then an attacking idea is to play Bc4, 0-0 and Qe1 exploiting the missing f pawn to sneak the Queen to h4.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Gambit
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 1392
Location: Newark
Joined: 07/26/05
Gender: Male
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #20 - 01/14/14 at 10:10:58
Post Tools
But I should warn you, RdC, that there are many books showing how to play against 4...c5 and 5...c5 .
  
Back to top
YIM  
IP Logged
 
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 866
Joined: 05/17/08
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #19 - 01/14/14 at 09:05:20
Post Tools
Gambit wrote on 01/14/14 at 04:37:59:
As someone who has played the BDG for 23 years, I should say that the 4...c5 and 5...c5 lines are not very common. I do not see them that much even in numerous Internet Chess Club blitz games I play. What does that tell you? That it is rare, but one must be prepared.


It tells me exactly what I want to hear. Slight exaggeration perhaps, but in OTB chess, I face the BDG about once every ten years. Variations that are playable where my opponent is likely to have  little experience in practice are absolutely ideal.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Gambit
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 1392
Location: Newark
Joined: 07/26/05
Gender: Male
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #18 - 01/14/14 at 04:37:59
Post Tools
First of all, the correct spelling is Blackmar-Diemer, not "Diemar." If you want to criticize something, at least spell the name correctly. The surname Diemer must be more easy to spell than, say, Quaade.

Second, the variation 1 d4 d5 2 e4 dxe4 3 Nc3 e5 is nothing to be scared of. There may follow, to put it briefly:

A) 4 Qh5, the Sneiders Attack;

A1) 4...Nc6! 5 Bb5 Bd7 6 Bxc6 Bxc6 7 Qxe5+ Be7 =+

B) 4 Nge2! Rasmussen Attack;

C) 4 dxe5 Qxd1 5 Kxd1, Endgame Variation;

D) 4 Nxe4, the A. Lange Gambit;

E) 4 Be3?!

Personally, I used to play 4 Qh5 in my younger days, but since stopped. These days, I think both 4 Nge2! and 4 Nxe4 give White a decent game.

With regard to 1 d4 d5 2 e4 dxe4 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 f3 c5, this is the Brombacher Counter-Gambit. I have played both 5 d5 and 5 Bf4!? in tournament games and blitz.
Closely related to the Brombacher Counter-Gambit is the Kaulich Defense, which arises after 4...exf3 5 Nxf3 c5. I think that 6 d5 and 6 Bf4 each have their positive and negative sides.

As someone who has played the BDG for 23 years, I should say that the 4...c5 and 5...c5 lines are not very common. I do not see them that much even in numerous Internet Chess Club blitz games I play. What does that tell you? That it is rare, but one must be prepared.

  If you wish to see some games, I can share some games from a blitz-match I had back in 1997 with a friend of mine.
  
Back to top
YIM  
IP Logged
 
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 866
Joined: 05/17/08
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #17 - 01/11/14 at 08:37:15
Post Tools
  MNb wrote on 01/10/14 at 21:57:33:
why you neglect the transposition 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 c5 or 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 c5. It saves you work.


I wouldn't play 3. .. Nf6. In the one game when I was expecting a Diemar, I played 1. ..d5 and then 3. ..e5. I've also tried playing e5 after Nf6, but I think it leads to potential trouble after dxe5. I'm looking for a middle game with an advantage to Black, for preference one where the advantage isn't grabbing a pawn and fending off an attack.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Online


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10574
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: c5 against the Blackmar-Diemar
Reply #16 - 01/10/14 at 21:57:33
Post Tools
RdC wrote on 01/10/14 at 21:31:33:
If the Blackmar-Diemar has any point to it at all isn't that the tabiya that White is aiming for?

No, not really. Other potential weak spots are b7 and h7.
What I don't get is this: if you like ...c5 so much (I'm not arguing it's bad or something; only that White has better prospects for full compensation than in other variations like the Hübsch 3...Nxe4) why you neglect the transposition 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 c5 or 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 c5. It saves you work.
  

The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo