Can I suggest splitting the 1 e4 e5 section into Spanish and non-Spanish, as on the forum?

MNb wrote on 08/11/19 at 16:29:59:


There's no doubt about it! 

FrenchRefutes1e4 wrote on 08/08/19 at 00:04:12:


Jupp53 wrote on 08/08/19 at 00:15:53:


PatzerNoster wrote on 08/08/19 at 16:46:33:


Calm down, everybody.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EY7EIZl4raY


Jupp53 wrote on 08/08/19 at 00:15:53:



PatzerNoster wrote on 08/08/19 at 16:46:33:


Thanks for your assistance (both of you), but you can safely let me do the moderating.

I suppose the orignal site layout was aimed at appearing as interesting as possible to attract as many subscribers as possible. However, opening theory progresses, openings that were popular become backwaters and openings that were almost unknown in 1999 are now the height of theory.
I am happy to consider alternatives - it is possible to change the layout, of course, and it is even possible to add more sections, theoretically.
However, assuming there was a consensus on how to divide the different openings one potential problem would be how to deal with subscribers who no longer had access to the openings they subscribed to? For example, if I put the Sveshnikov in with the Dragon I will surely get complaints from all the Sveshnikov fans who subscribed to the Open Sicilians section.

FrenchRefutes1e4 wrote on 08/08/19 at 00:04:12:


Please watch your language!
Do you need to call me stupid on account of something I never even said?


I just said that the Dragon has many supporters, even people who do not play it themselves.

Tony just confirmed me by saying that it sells well. 

Of course I do not disagree that Najdorf is played way more often, a quick search in Mega 2019 revealed the following:

1.Najdorf (about 190.000)
2.Classical (more than 80.000)
3./4. Dragon/Kan (about 70.000)

And please do not forget that there is still the Accelerated Dragon included in this section, which is difficult to count because of many move orders, but 2. ... Nc6 3.d4 cd4: 4.Nd4: g6 alone has more than 50.000 games!

Withholding these points, the Dragon is a very special variation with its own flair, and that is a valid reason for it to have its own section in my view.

Your statements on the Dragon just reveal you do not know a lot about it or chess in general.
Perhaps you should subscibe to the section?! 

FrenchRefutes1e4 wrote on 08/08/19 at 00:04:12:

If the Dragon is a known draw, why aren't they playing it all the time with Black in the super tournaments? Or, to turn the board around, why are some top players still playing the Open Sicilian against 2...d6?

sanaz wrote on 08/06/19 at 05:53:17:


I can tell you that these exact same sections existed in 1999.  Not sure if the site existed before then.  All that has changed is the people that write for it, like back in the day, Neil McDonald wrote the French section, Paul Motwani wrote the double King Pawn section, etc.  I could be wrong, but I believe the Dragon, Nimzo/Benoni, and Daring Defenses are the only sections still written by the original authors.

That said, I have heard people say that the one that runs (or maybe even owns) this site is really, really, REALLY against change.  Not sure which is in more need of change - this site, or the electoral system in the United States!