Only Chess
26 Aug 07
27 Aug 07
Originally posted by Dragon FireUncalled for but true, ion the other hand, it's chess... go pull a rahimk or something if you're that serious.
[b]The contents of a series of PMs on z00ts claim the Morra Gambit is a mikey mouse opening.
DF > Then why did I win Game 3676033 against a player rated above 2000?
z00t > Because your opponent does not know how to play against the Smith Morra. I was playing it against a player now removed for 3(a) and black should not allow what ...[text shortened]... shed source to back your claims up?
Do I really need to comment further on this c***?[/b]
Otherwise keep it a gentlemans game 😉.
27 Aug 07
Originally posted by Dragon FireUsing wikipedia as argument is the funniest in this conversation.
z00t > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith-Morra_Gambit says It is not common in grandmaster games, but at club level chess it is an excellent weapon Do you have any published source to back your claims up?
And anyway - "not popular" and "unsound" is not actually the same. See discussion in Thread 70577
27 Aug 07
2 edits
In fact Wikipedia is not the only one. See http://www.jeremysilman.com/book_reviews_rb/rb_Smith_Mora_Finegold_Var.html
Where it says "The fact that there is so little master level theory and practice on this line does give one pause, but perhaps it is not so hard to explain. For one thing, there are several playable black alternatives against the Smith-Morra Gambit; given the lack of higher level contests with the gambit it is possible that black players have not felt the need to explore new lines. Second, the few master level games played with the line have mostly been cases of black players stumbling into the positions without necessarily having appreciated the nature of proper play of the positions. Some ugly losses may have deterred black players from further exploring the possibilities of the set-up."
Class what does "The fact that there is so little master level theory and practice on this line does give one pause,or given the lack of higher level contests with the gambit mean?
27 Aug 07
2 edits
Originally posted by z00tDid you search in databases to check it out?
In fact Wikipedia is not the only one. See http://www.jeremysilman.com/book_reviews_rb/rb_Smith_Mora_Finegold_Var.html
Where it says [b]"The fact that there is so little master level theory and practice on this line does give one pause, but perhaps it is not so hard to explain. For one thing, there are several playable black alternatives against the Smith-Mo ...[text shortened]... ."
Class what does given the lack of higher level contests with the gambit mean?[/b]
And if you did not read I may repeat you again "not popular" and "unsound" are not the same"
About unsoundness of Smith-morra gambit:
Without showing particular lines, which can refute Smith-Morra Gambit it`s only their subjective opinion.
P.S. The fact that one of authors of that article is IM means nothing - even GMs sometimes manages to write pure BS.
27 Aug 07
The article says "IM Ben Finegold was brought into the project to provide analytic support and positional evaluations. The authors also enlisted the help of other strong players, including FM Fred Lindsay, IM Jack Peters, and GM Dmitry Gurevich".
If that does not convince anyone the earlier statements are self-explanatory The fact that there is so little master level theory and practice on this line or given the lack of higher level contests with the gambit.
I think Gurevich was playing on the Candidates matches the other day so it would be someone who has lived on Mars who can disregard the above statements.
27 Aug 07
5 edits
Originally posted by z00tAs you are have problems to read what I have wrote I`ll give you one more chance to read main questions:
The article says [b]"IM Ben Finegold was brought into the project to provide analytic support and positional evaluations. The authors also enlisted the help of other strong players, including FM Fred Lindsay, IM Jack Peters, and GM Dmitry Gurevich".
If that does not convince anyone the earlier statements are self-explanatory The fact that there is so other day so it would be someone who has lived on Mars who can disregard the above statements.[/b]
Did you search in databases to be sure that there are no
IMs and GMs who uses Smith-Morra gambit?
Does the fact that Smith-Morra is not so popular as other Sicilian lines means that it is unsound? Have you read discussion in Thread 70577 where statements like that were refuted?
Can you show refutation of Smith-Morra gambit?
27 Aug 07
Originally posted by Dr StrangeloveAnyone can talk crap but the article comes up with a few irrefutable facts :-
Anyone can talk crap as you surely know...lol.
-The fact that there is so little master level theory and practice on this line
-given the lack of higher level contests with the gambit
That in fact concurs with what I told Dragon Fire at the start It is not common in grandmaster games, but at club level chess it is an excellent weapon
Mr Fire made a serious misstatement "The Morra is a playable opening that is played at GM level and which can get good results for white." Not only does he have any sources to back himself up he has just contradicted the facts in the above article.
27 Aug 07
3 edits
Originally posted by z00t-The fact that there is so little master level theory and practice on this line
Anyone can talk crap but the article comes up with a few irrefutable facts :-
-The fact that there is so little master level theory and practice on this line
-given the lack of higher level contests with the gambit
That in fact concurs with what I told Dragon Fire at the start It is not common in grandmaster games, but at club level chess it is an ex e have any sources to back himself up he has just contradicted the facts in the above article.
-given the lack of higher level contests with the gambit
Its their subjective evaluation without facts.
And what did they mean with "higher level" and "master level" (contests of IMs, GMs or maybe only topGMs)?
27 Aug 07
1 edit
Originally posted by PhlabibitTrue!
PM's!? Did you know the P in PM stands for Private... not Public.
P-
(1) My apologies to z00t for publicly revealing such private matters. 😉
(2) My apologies to mikey for dreadful mispelling of rodents names. 😞
(3) ... but no apologies for spelling or misquoting anything as these messages are copied and pasted from the PMs. 🙂
now I must 😴
27 Aug 07
2 edits
Originally posted by z00tOk z00t, I agree DF shouldn't really try to score points by airing PM's in public forums.
Anyone can talk crap but the article comes up with a few irrefutable facts :-
-The fact that there is so little master level theory and practice on this line
-given the lack of higher level contests with the gambit
That in fact concurs with what I told Dragon Fire at the start [b]It is not common in grandmaster games, but at club level chess it is an ex e have any sources to back himself up he has just contradicted the facts in the above article.
By way of interest, I give the line in the Morra which Silman & Gallagher suggest as a possible refutation to the gambit & one which any serious Morra gambiteer should know from both sides:
1.e4...c5
2.d4...cxd4
3.c3...dxc3
4.Nxc3...Nc6
5.Nf3...d6
6.Bc4...a6!
This is the toughest line for white to attempt to continue to pressure the black position.
The routine looking
7.0-0?
is no good for white unless black plays badly. The 2nd player can build a solid defence giving little chance for white to attack via the usual Morra routes of Nd5/Nb5, Qb3, e4-e5 etc
The continuation 7.0-0? is played hundreds of times in this line, giving very good results for black.
For instance, on chesslive.de this brings 481 games.
1-0 = 146 --- 31%
0-1 = 219 --- 45%
1/2-1/2 = 116 --- 24%
As you can see 31% white wins in such a frequently played line makes for a very poor database showing for white in the Morra as a whole.
This "at first glance" approach is probably why so many people jump on the bandwagon & say that the Morra is plain unsound or at best risky for white.
However, there is a cure.
The correct continuation is:
7.Bg5!
threatening
8.Qb3! amongst other things.
ie
Game 3829842
I don't want to give too much away (as there is a MG tourni on at the moment!) but in certain lines after 7.Bg5! in this "refutation" line of the Morra, white has plenty of play & excellent results on my database, allbeit that the lines are largely untested.
It would be great to see a GM play some of these lines as white; then I suspect you'd get the explosion of interest in the Morra in the same way you had it in the Evans or certain lines of the Scotch after Kasparov decided to dust them off & win with them!
27 Aug 07
Originally posted by z00tThe Encyclopaedia Britannica, a well known reference source for all matters relating to chess. I had better throw away all my other books and stick to this definitive reference from now on..
If it isn't Mr Fire who claims that he does not disclose the contents of PMs in forums and then misquotes me. Well, well, well we all know that the Morra gambit is rare above club level.
Before I go any further has Mr Fire attached any evidence to support his claim or is he just making empty noise. If he can show me an entry on the Encyclopaedia Britannica I would accept that as evidence.
I quote from the following more reliable sources
From the introduction of Morra Gambit by Jozsef Palkovi " ... the Morra Gambit was and is used as a surprise weapon by strong players such as Adams, Chandler, Minasian and Illescas and by greats of the past such as Bobby Fisher and Matulovic. It has happened more than once that even a notable grandmaster has had to capitulate with the black pieces against an unknown".
and from the forward of The Modern Morra Gambit by Hannes Langrock in the words of GM Dr Karsten Muller "... the Morra Gambit is well-suited for players striving for tactical and uncompromising play, as White's better development often leads to a dangerous initiative. Furthermore, traditional Sicilian players may be taken by surprise and removed from theire main line repertoire."
By way of example I give the following game
R. Fisher vs V. Korchnoi
1. e4 .. c5;
2. d4 .. cxd;
3. c3 .. dxc;
4. Nxc3 .. Nc6;
5. Nf3 .. d6;
6. Bc4 .. e6;
7. 0-0 .. Nf6;
8. Qe2 .. a6;
9. Rd1 .. Qc7;
10. Bg5?! [a mistake by Fisher as 10. Bf4! is more aggressive] .. Be7;
11. Rac1 .. 0-0;
12. Bb3! .. h6;
13. Bf4 .. e5;
14. Be3 .. Qd8;
15. Nd5 .. Nxd5;
16. Bxd5 .. Bd7;
17. Nd2 .. Nb4!?;
18. Bb3 .. Bg5;
19. Bxg5 .. Qxg5;
20. Nf3 .. Bg4!;
21. Rc7 .. Qd8;
22. Rxb7 .. Rb8;
23. Rxb8 .. Qxb8;
24. h3 .. Bxf3;
25. Qxf3 .. Nc6;
26. Qd3 .. Nd4;
27. Bc4 .. a5;
28. b3 .. Qb4;
29. f4 .. Kh7
draw agreed.
In conclusion (although Fisher drew this) I believe that if it is good enough for him to draw against Korchnoi it is good enough for me
Now, dear z00t, can you produce real evidence to support your stand or withdraw and concede that these "mickey mouse" openings are indeed playable at the very highest level.