18 Mar 07
Originally posted by rubberjaw30My point exactly. I'm sure people thought the Caro-Kann showed no potential either. 1...h5 will grow in popularity, just you wait and see...!
ys, the Caro-Kann was thought of as totally inferior until the late 19th century when two GMs analyzed it...
no one has thoroughly analyzed 1. ... h5?
because it shows no potential whatsoever...
18 Mar 07
Originally posted by Raven69i tell you what, you write Pal Benko...
My point exactly. I'm sure people thought the Caro-Kann showed no potential either. 1...h5 will grow in popularity, just you wait and see...!
his address is listed in his articles for Chess Life magazine
tell him that you think he should take a serious look at 1. ... h5
if he doesn't laugh at you outright, I will submiss and take back all the nasty things I said
18 Mar 07
1 edit
Originally posted by Korchoh...
You misunderstood me - I want him to show game in which he have won stronger player with black using his 1...h5
in that case...
i'd love to see a game...
where does your engine put the position after
1. e4 h5?
2. d4 h4?
3. h3 c6
4. Nf3 d5
5. Nc3
just curious
18 Mar 07
Originally posted by Raven69The difference with the Caro-Kann is that c6 supports a square in the centre, and doesn't weaken the kingside. Tony Miles once famously beat Karpov with 1. e4 a6, but the difference with Tony Miles is that he prepared the opening carefully as a one off weapon to beat a particular opponent with something unusual that also had a point to it and never repeated the experiment. 1. ... h5 on the other hand gives every appearance of being total detritus.
My point exactly. I'm sure people thought the Caro-Kann showed no potential either. 1...h5 will grow in popularity, just you wait and see...!
18 Mar 07
3 edits
Originally posted by rubberjaw30After 3 minutes thinking rybka rates it only abut 0,50 in whites favour.
oh...
in that case...
i'd love to see a game...
where does your engine put the position after
1. e4 h5?
2. d4 h4?
3. h3 c6
4. Nf3 d5
5. Nc3
just curious
btw. According to engine white dont need to play h3 and develop like Nc3-Nf3 ect. because black h-pawn seems absolutely harmless
18 Mar 07
1 edit
Originally posted by Korchok, so h3 is unnecessary?
After 3 minutes thinking rybka rates it only abut 0,50 in whites favour.
btw. According to engine white dont need to play h3 and develop like Nc3-Nf3 ect. because black h-pawn seems absolutely useless
meaning that white ends up with 2 extra tempi at his disposal?
so, let's try this line...
1. e4 h5?
2. d4 h4?
what does Rybka give as best?
any developing move other than Nf3?
i wouldn't play Nf3 because then h3 just doubles up my pawns on h for one pawn...
yuck!
18 Mar 07
Originally posted by rubberjaw30About 0,40. Engine shows that black can play 4...b5 5.Bd3 (5.Bb3 b4 6.Nce2 Nf6 is not so good for white) b4 6.Nce2 Nf6 with not so bad position. White dont need to move their bishops too early. Better is to move both knights first.
ok, so h3 is unnecessary?
meaning that white ends up with 2 extra tempi at his disposal?
so, let's try this line...
1. e4 h5?
2. d4 h4?
what does Rybka give as best?
any developing move other than Nf3?
i wouldn't play Nf3 because then h3 just doubles up my pawns on h for one pawn...
yuck!
18 Mar 07
Originally posted by KorchP.S. After 4...b5 5.Bd3 b4 6.Nce2 Nf6 rybka advices 7.h3 as best. Perhaps because white squared bishop is moved.
About 0,40. Engine shows that black can play 4...b5 5.Bd3 (5.Bb3 b4 6.Nce2 Nf6 is not so good for white) b4 6.Nce2 Nf6 with not so bad position. White dont need to move their bishops too early. Better is to move both knights first.