|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Apr-17-04 | | Benjamin Lau: E J Diemer vs Heiling, 1984
You said you would not be posting until a week later and Hanada replied "Thanks for the schedule update. We'll all be waiting with bells on." This was right after Hanada thought you were making fun of the Albin countergambit, and so Hanada tried to insult you by displaying a distaste for your posts, but amusingly, you did not detect the sarcasm in his post and responded with good nature. There is another attempt at an insult but I don't want to bother looking for that one as well. The past is the past. |
|
| Apr-18-04 | | nikolaas: <Benjamin Lau> Thanks. And sorry for the foult in your name in my last post here. Beside, you're right: the past is past so we'd better forget this misunderstanding and stay friends. |
|
| Apr-18-04 | | Hanada: <nikolaas>
It's cool man, all this stupidity started because I misunderstood one of your previous posts. My apologies... However, I do take issue to the way Benjamin Lau replies to posts. I have read a number of his previous kibitzes and I can safely say that I am not the only one on this site that feels this way. Of course, I'm sure he is going to give his usual reply of, " <Hanada> Provide specific quotes where I...yada yada yada..". You know what though, I am too lazy to do that so let's call it a day. :) |
|
| Apr-18-04 | | Benjamin Lau: Hanada, I can say the same for you. |
|
| Apr-19-04 | | nikolaas: <Hanada&Benjamin Lau> Please forget it all and stay friend, okay? At least, try it! The past IS past, so why longer offending one another? We all can become angry, no? Come on, it's not worth an argument. |
|
| Aug-15-04 | | patzer2: Fritz found an amazing resource that turns the tables and gives Black a win via a Queen Sacrifice! Fritz 8 indicates Black wins after 30...Bxg2!! 31. Ng6+ Rxg6 32. Rxe7 Bh3! 33. Re1 Nxf4 34. Rxb4 Ne2+ 35. Kh1 Re6! 36. b6 c5 37. Rb2 Rf2 38. Ra8+ Kh7 39. Qd5 Re5 40. Ra8 Nc3 41. Rbb1 Nxb1 42. Rxb1 Ree2 43. Kg1 (43. b7 Rxh2+ 44. Kg1 Reg2+ 45. Kf1 Rh1#) 43...d3 44. Qe4+ Rxe4 45. Kxf2 Re2+ 46. Kf3 Bg2+ 47. Kf4 d2 48. Rd1 g5+ 49. Kf5 c4 50. b7 Bxb7  . The final position is an obvious win, and the Fritz assessment is huge (-19.00 @ 12/40 depth & 1441kN/s). |
|
| Feb-03-05 | | Poisonpawns: This gambit has the same problem is many other gambits.Blsck gives up a pawn for a lead in development, or in this case to hinder whites natural development by setting a wedge in the position.Which doesn`t work because white developes his pieces to fine posts.Then white allows black to regain the pawn, but his position is filled with weaknesses.On move 13. whites position looks great, while blacks looks awkward, look at the queen on d7 blocking the bishop,and the rooks.All black has for compensation are those 2 pawns in the center which are quickly undermined by e3.Then black has an iso.All i can say is i like when i play against this in tourneys.I think if someone likes these positions as black they should play the tarrach defense, for an isolated pawn, you are guarenteed free piece play without being down a pawn. |
|
| Feb-06-05 | | FUNFZEHN: This opening is nice at any level. An hour of study to learn blacks ideas and anyone 2200 level and below can play this openinng with no trouble. IM competition doesnt know the lines then easy for black to get attack on kingside. This is fine for any level. |
|
| Feb-07-05 | | RisingChamp: <Poisonpawns>,Benjamin Lau,and on another page Helloween make this sound so simple,that you would think they would win every game they faced against it no matter how strong the opponent(which should be the case for any opening which is refuted as they claimed)However the succeses in recent classical chess games of Sokolov(2685)-Morozevich 0-1 and Dreev (2704)-Nakamura 0.5-0.5 confirm the fact that this opening is fully viable at the high levels,let alone being refuted.As for the debate between Hanada and Benjamin Lau,I side with Hanada,it is clear that as a refutation of an opening which is enjoying a rennaisance,Helloweens postings are highly superficial,and his claims highly exaggerated<"has been proven thotoughly unsound">when in fact even Boris Alterman says that is considered unsound more on principle,because the compensation isnt clearly established,rather than that any specific forced line has been demonstrated leading to a clear white advantage.Benjamin Lau says "as DK said show your winning line-well somebody saying this opening is refuted should do so.I can envisage this opening enjpying a rennaisance as the Chigorin did. |
|
| Feb-07-05 | | Poisonpawns: <RisingChamp> Well said, but I never said the Albin was refuted.I was stating some of the known problems black has in the opening, and that i like to play against it as white.I cannot speak for the other fellows who said it is refuted, that is obviously an exagerration to say the least.On the other hand the problems i pointed out in the albin are part of the reason it is frowned upon,there are just simply better openings for black to play against 1.d4 than the albin,Tarrach,Dutch,Budapest all have better reputations.One more point,I am also a correspondance chess player and in high level correspondance games black will NEVER play this opening unless it is against a weak opp.My Question to you all is WHY? :-) |
|
| Feb-08-05 | | RisingChamp: I have one counter question for you-a serious one to which I never figured out the answer,and since you are a good correspondence player,I will ask you-How is that even the highest level of correspondence play,for example Estrin vs Berliner etc see openings which are considered poor,and hardly ever seen in top OTB chess games.Surely given the fact that there is no surprise element,and that refutations can be leisurely sought,how come correspondence chess openings are more experimentational than OTB openings? Of course the Albin doesnt have a very good rep-but that is changing a bit I think,and being an e4 player myself,I have no idea whether it is easy or difficult to face,but my quarrel is mainly with the folks who speak about the opening in terms of inaccurate objective evaluations,rather than an entirely correct statement that is considered dubious.It looks interesting to me and I will study it some time,but using it seems remote,since they are too many declinations which will leave me uncomfortable-like the Budapest.For now I am sticking to the Leningrad Dutch. |
|
| Feb-08-05 | | Poisonpawns: Estrin vs Berliner 1965 was played because Estrin was a renowned expert in this opening at the time and berliner could count on estrin playing into this line, so he prepared a special line for him.The rest is history.Actually on the contrary, you see openings such as Kings gambit,Latvian etc mostly in theme tourneys.If you chk the top CC players like Umansky,Oim,berliner,you will see ruy lopez and queens gambit etc.OTB ANYTHING well almost anything is playable at least for the suprise value.Susan Polgar uses this game in her article in this month`s chess life article in her discussion on the albin.Susan Polgar on the albin: "The albin-counter gambit is certainly a risky opening to play as black on a regular basis.However, it can be interesting to use it once in a while as a suprise weapon."Moving on she says;"As white,there is not much to fear.The plan is usually clear:Try to win the advanced d-pawn!White is also looking for the right opportunity to givre the e5-pawn back." |
|
| Apr-18-12 | | hellopolgar: <Classical games: Alexander Morozevich beat Loek Van Wely 10 to 1, with 3 draws.> Let's just say moro under estimated his opponent here. 29. ... Nc2 would have won on the spot for black. |
|
| Apr-22-16 | | Hanada: Holy cow, finding my posts, that I don't even remember writing, twelve years later. I haven't been active on the site for a long time and am actually back to study the Albin for a corr game I am playing. I totally forgot about he f6 line...how is everyone doing? I really got worked up defending the Albin, crazy. |
|
May-15-19
 | | HeMateMe: I got the pun when I came back ten minutes later, funny stuff. |
|
May-15-19
 | | scormus: Fork? Oh yes, 41 Qb7 ;) |
|
May-15-19
| | HeMateMe: Well, I missed the Star Wars reference at first. |
|
| May-15-19 | | rcs784: <scormus> I was actually thinking of 32. Ng6+, which is a family fork as well as a discovery on the queen. |
|
| May-15-19 | | The Kings Domain: Good game and good pun. :-) |
|
May-15-19
| | scormus: <rcs784> ;)
of course, had Morozevich played 29 ... Nc2 and gone on to win, you could have made the pun <beware Loek, the dark side of the fork> |
|
| May-15-19 | | Ironmanth: Great game of fisticuffs! Thanks, chessgames. Y'all have a great day playing, studying, learning! |
|
May-15-19
| | scormus: ....sorry, I was joking about Qc7 (as well as having finger trouble) Great game, great pun of yours! |
|
| May-15-19 | | thegoodanarchist: Good pun. |
|
| May-15-19 | | catlover: I can hear Alec Guinness's voice in my head as I read the game title. |
|
May-15-19
 | | TheAlchemist: Genius pun! |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
