04 Mar 07
Originally posted by rubberjaw30Maurice Ashley used to play the exchange variation from the White side... you can check out his games at www.chesslab.com
can anyone find a GM game with this line?
i don't know what sites to go to, and gogle always gives me a bunch of crap that has nothing to do with what I am looking for...
too bad wikipedia doesn't offer a chess database by opening...
04 Mar 07
Originally posted by Diet CokeDiet Coke, your probably a great player...
Let's play.
Edit: I tried to challenge rubberjaw, but my rating is to high for him.
But why should you always pretend that your better than everyone else?
Seriously, everyone starts somewhere, so give ppl a break.
I've only been playing a bit more than 2 months now and probably dont at all have the experiance you have, and I respect you for that.
Just respect those who want to learn.
Im not trying to start a feud here. Just wanted to point that out.
05 Mar 07
cmsMaster pretty much explains it in his post. Basically, when you go 3. exd5 exd5, your trading your e4 pawn for black's e6 pawn. Now black's problem bishop has a free game, and he has an equal share of the center. So less bite than the usual 3. e5 or 3. Nc3 variations, but still respectable.
05 Mar 07
Originally posted by Zander 88Exactly.
cmsMaster pretty much explains it in his post. Basically, when you go 3. exd5 exd5, your trading your e4 pawn for black's e6 pawn. Now black's problem bishop has a free game, and he has an equal share of the center. So less bite than the usual 3. e5 or 3. Nc3 variations, but still respectable.
05 Mar 07
Originally posted by TommyCKasparov also won with the Scotch and the Evans gambit. Openings which are not often considered good enough to win with at GM level. That is more of a credit to Kasparov than anything else. The point someone made about dynamism in the position is essential to understanding. Lacking that, neither player really has much chance to win. However, if there is a big enough difference in skill level, the better player will probably win regardless.
Kasparov played the French Exchange three times in serious games. He beat Salov and Kortchnoi, and drew against Short but should have won.
05 Mar 07
Originally posted by zebanoThere are lots of non-dynamic openings that offer winning chances, eg the QGD.
Kasparov also won with the Scotch and the Evans gambit. Openings which are not often considered good enough to win with at GM level. That is more of a credit to Kasparov than anything else. The point someone made about dynamism in the position is essential to understanding. Lacking that, neither player really has much chance to win. However, if there is a big enough difference in skill level, the better player will probably win regardless.
05 Mar 07
1 edit
Originally posted by TommyCI don't think you understand what I mean by dynmics. Dynamics refers simply to short term imbalances. The QGD has them in spades, the only one offered by the french exchange is half a move.
There are lots of non-dynamic openings that offer winning chances, eg the QGD.
Edit: Dynamics != Tactics.
05 Mar 07
Originally posted by zebanoThat's *not* what 'dynamics' means in chess terminology!
I don't think you understand what I mean by dynmics. Dynamics refers simply to short term imbalances. The QGD has them in spades, the only one offered by the french exchange is half a move.
Edit: Dynamics != Tactics.
05 Mar 07
Originally posted by UmbrageOfSnowyeah...
!= means 'not equal to"
but anyway...
as far as i am concerned about this opening:
it gains the measly half-move, and it also accomplishes getting black out of book french defense...
which technically isn't an advantage...
but it can be useful in OTB play...