|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 6 OF 16 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Feb-03-05 | | Leviathan: <azaris> I don't think that in most openings black can "easily" equalise, but anyway I will rephrase that: black can equalise VERY easily in the Sokolsky, a lot more easily than in the 'regular' openings. |
|
| Feb-03-05 | | Leviathan: Oh. <Willem Wallekers> was quicker than me :) |
|
| Feb-03-05 | | Leviathan: <why does anyone bother with 1...e5 then?> because it would be the same with any other move. If white plays a correct opening, he is always "hotter" than black. |
|
| Feb-03-05 | | Willem Wallekers: <why does anyone bother with 1...e5 then?>
Because all the alternatives aren't dead easy either. |
|
| Feb-03-05 | | azaris: <If white plays a correct opening, he is always "hotter" than black.> This mythical correct opening does not exist. You're just repeating psychological opening mantra that says White must be better even in situations where there is no analytical reason to claim so. |
|
| Feb-03-05 | | Willem Wallekers: White is half a move ahead at the beginning.
All statistics show white's chances are better than black's. |
|
| Feb-03-05 | | Leviathan: <azaris> Are you saying that white's initial advantage is just "psychological opening mantra"? I hope not. We all perfectly know that white has some advantage because he has the initiative (he creates threats and black must parry them), therefore if white keeps that initiative he is playing a 'correct' opening and his position is better anyway. |
|
| Feb-03-05 | | azaris: <Willem Wallekers> You won't win a chessgame by playing with the white pieces. You'll win a chess game by playing good moves. With best play, all reasonable openings lead to equality. The reason why White does well statistically is a combination of defeatist attitude from Black players and the fact that many openings are tricky for Black and one mistake can be fatal. In contrast White won't usually fall into a lost game even if he makes an inaccurate move or two. |
|
| Feb-03-05 | | azaris: <We all perfectly know that white has some advantage because he has the initiative (he creates threats and black must parry them)> Depends on the value of "know", but there are certainly people out there who think this line of thinking is not entirely correct and it has been challenged many times. |
|
| Feb-03-05 | | Leviathan: <With best play, all reasonable openings lead to equality> I never said that white should win simply with a correct opening. I was talking about the advantage of having the initiative. <defeatist attitude from Black players> this is an extremely weak argument. <many openings are tricky for Black and one mistake can be fatal. In contrast White won't usually fall into a lost game even if he makes an inaccurate move or two> that's because black's task is to defend himself. If he makes a mistake white can get immediatly a decisive advantage because he was already threatening to do so. On the other hand if white throws away the initiative with a mistake, black cannot attack immediatly: he only earns the opportunity to make threats himself. <there are certainly people out there who think this line of thinking is not entirely correct and it has been challenged many times> "Their" opinion isn't supported by any evidence. My opinion is supported by the statistics: white wins more often than black, ergo he must have some kind of advantage due to the fact that he plays first. |
|
| Feb-03-05 | | schnarre: <Leviathan> For White, initiative is certainly a bonus. Maintaining it could be tricky if dealing with a strong/confident Black player. I agree that "defeatist attitude from Black players" is a weak argument (being a regular Black player myself). In my experience, patience & careful planning (& not being intimidated by an opponent's possibly higher rating) goes a long way for Black. Style of play also figures in. |
|
| Feb-03-05 | | AgentRgent: <Leviathan: <defeatist attitude from Black players> this is an extremely weak argument.> Not to speak for him, but I believe the point Azaris was trying to make is this: Most players with Black, thinking as you do that White already has an advantage, subconsciously give White an advantage. |
|
| Feb-03-05 | | schnarre: <AgentRgent> I agree. |
|
| Feb-03-05 | | acirce: I agree with that specific point about psychology as well, but it doesn't mean that White doesn't have an objective advantage. Still, it would be interesting to conduct some kind of experiment on that aspect, if possible. The <with best play, all reasonable openings lead to equality> is probably true -- but only in the limited sense that chess as a game is ultimately a draw with best play. You don't say about a rook endgame with pawn up for White that it is equal just because it is drawn with perfect play (assuming it is). |
|
| Feb-03-05 | | schnarre: <acirce> It would be possible to carry out an experiment on that aspect, but the "Hows" & "Whys" would need to be nailed down.
"with best play, all reasonable openings lead to equality" is perhaps true if the opening played fits the playing style of the one using it: I would not expect a passive player to be defending 1. e4 d5, for example (I'd expect a Caro-Kann). |
|
| Feb-03-05 | | Akavall: <schnarre>
I always thought that 1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 was the most passive defense against 1.e4 there. 1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Nf6 is not of course. |
|
| Feb-04-05 | | schnarre: <Akavall> Either line of the Scandinavian goes for the jugular--1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3 Qa5 4. d4 e5 is one example, 1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Nf6 3. c4 Bf5 4. Nc3 e6 is yet another--instantly aggressive (& quite effective)! |
|
| Feb-04-05 | | Akavall: <schnarre> As far as I know 4...e5 is a fairly rare move. But I don't see it as aggressive, how does black respond to 5. dxe5? if 5...Qxd4 white can play 6. Qe2 and black has to exchange queens and white has a tiny advantage. (I am pretty sure white doesn't have to play 6. Qe2, but they have that option). Maybe black shouldn't take the pawn right away, I am not really familiar with this line, but most lines in 1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 are very solid. |
|
| Feb-04-05 | | schnarre: <Akavall> 4...e5 (Anderssen's Variation) has quite a few replies vs. 5.dxe5: one example is 1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3 Qa5 4. d4 e5 5.dxe5 Bb4 6. Bd2 Nc6 7. Nf3 Bg4 8. Be2 0-0-0 (from a game in 1925). John Lutes' book 'Scandinavian Defense: Anderssen Counterattack' covers 4...e5 in great detail & is well-researched. |
|
| Feb-04-05 | | Akavall: <schnarre> Even if that line does lead a sharp game, it doesn't mean 1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 is sharp. There are sharp rare lines in every opening, take, 1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Nf6 5.Nxf6 gxf6 in Caro-Kann, for example. |
|
| Feb-04-05 | | schnarre: <Akavall> Ah yes, the Bronstein-Larsen line! Scrappy yet doesn't take away from the Caro-Kann's solid character. |
|
| Feb-05-05 | | Akavall: <schnarre> Are we in agreement? Caro-Kann and Scandinavian are overall solid openings even though there are some lines in them that are sharp. |
|
| Feb-06-05 | | schnarre: <Akavall> Sounds that way to me! |
|
| Feb-28-05 | | TennesseeStud: i think that the best openings for black are the ones in which white must play accurately or be destroyed, if white has 1 move out of 10 that keeps his advantage thats fairly sharp, but in openings like the caro-kann, white, even in the late opening, has plenty of decent moves that keep his advantage, thus making the caro-kann an advantageous opening for white. any one get me here? |
|
Mar-01-05
 | | An Englishman: Good Evening: Early on in my career, I learned to go into every game believing that I was going to win. If I was White, my slight initiative from having the opening move would only grow greater. If I had Black, I was going to take White's edge for myself, and there was nothing my opponent could do about it. How did I learn this? By experience. I realized that when I went into a game thinking about how tough my opponent was, I almost always lost. When I went into a game thinking I was going to win, I usually did. Yes, yes, yes, the statistics don't lie in this case; the advantage of the first move is not irrelevant. However, statistics can't compete with a winning attitude. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 6 OF 16 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
