Like lots of players, I let my moves do the hating. Spiteful words, throwing water, etc. can easily backfire. Difficult people wind up having problems in chessland with opponents doing extra preparation (including collusive preparation), playing to bare kings, publishing gleeful annotations, etc. But yes, as a last resort the martial arts are valuable for "correcting" people who don't understand how to keep it civil, in all walks of life.

MNb wrote on 09/29/20 at 16:48:33:

You know, until I finally looked at the video I just assumed you were talking about chess and wondered,"who are these aggressive or sleezy Dutch chess players I have never heard of? Must be some legendary team players from the Dutch league."

Though of course rough tackles like that would be even less accepted in a chess match. 

Thanks for the hint to the football article. Out of topic but a great lesson in English. 

pirc kid wrote on 09/29/20 at 06:52:42:

I have enjoyed and scored quite well in Reversed Grunfelds instead, if you haven't taken a look yet.

pirc kid wrote on 09/29/20 at 06:52:42:

Yes, this is the problem, agreed.

pirc kid wrote on 09/29/20 at 06:52:42:

I'll check out Svane, thanks!

pirc kid wrote on 09/29/20 at 06:52:42:

Yeah I think at some point I'll have to just settle on going 6.c4, picking a seventh move, and then force myself to love it. 

MNb wrote on 09/29/20 at 08:05:53:

I have never outright rejected hooliganry OR tomfoolery. 

TonyRo wrote on 09/28/20 at 15:01:32:

You also could allow yourself some hooliganry and play 2.h4; some pretty strong players have tried it.

[quote author=497273644F721D0 link=1601297423/8#8 date=1601305292]There is a mild downside that in some lines of the b3 KID you are committed to Bb2 too soon, e.g. 5...d6 6.b3 c5 7.c4! is not possible now, you'd transpose to 7.Bb2 cxd4 8.Nxd4 when if I remembering the position correctly, 8...d5! is possible. Not a big deal at all to me (I think my notes I think I thought that 9.c4!? dxc4 10.Na3 was at least interesting), 
Indeed this issue is unavoidable after 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.g3 g6 3.b3.

I'll have to look into that one - I think I might have and thought that 3...d4! was annoying. Gotta check my notes on that one! 

TonyRo wrote on 09/28/20 at 15:01:32:

Yes, Hausrath is also a player I follow since the release of his excellent book. I don't know Rakhmanov, thanks for the tip!

MNb wrote on 09/28/20 at 14:23:43:

Yes, and this is actually what I was doing for a while. There is a mild downside that in some lines of the b3 KID you are committed to Bb2 too soon, e.g. 5...d6 6.b3 c5 7.c4! is not possible now, you'd transpose to 7.Bb2 cxd4 8.Nxd4 when if I remembering the position correctly, 8...d5! is possible. Not a big deal at all to me (I think my notes I think I thought that 9.c4!? dxc4 10.Na3 was at least interesting), but there is worse. What do you play after 1.Nf3 d5 2.g3 g6 3.Bg2 Bg7, or 1.Nf3 g6 2.g3 Bg7? I would play d4 in both cases, but then you don't get that Anglo-Grunfeld option. I could go 2.e4 against the Modern if I could solve the former issue, but the repertoire would certainly be less compact than reaching the same position in all of these cases. I would definitely go the Anglo-Slav c4+d3 route if it was possible to avoid these transpo-tricks, I like that line stylistically anyway.

CanadianClub wrote on 09/28/20 at 14:32:03:

Georg was my coach for maybe two years or so I think - he is a great guy and every once in a while we catch up. I took a break from serious chess for a while, though I feel that bug creeping in again...perhaps it's time to start working with him again. Or at least once it's possible to play chess in person again and compete! 

TD wrote on 09/28/20 at 14:34:11:

Romanishin is a good call. Hausrath is another guy I follow. Alexander Rakhmanov also tends to be someone not a lot of people talk about, but he reaches similar positions. Always on the lookout for more of these guys that play these slower and tricky 1.Nf3 and 2.g3 positions. I've always wanted to eventually release a book on my White repertoire called "ZOOM 002", mostly because I think it would be funny and a nice tribute to a book I like quite a bit!