Originally posted by !~TONY~!Care to comment on the statistical significance of nearly 40 games between strong players featuring 1. c4 g5!? You can't have it both ways. At what level does significance apppear in chess openings? And what does it mean when they're refuted?
A reference to one game played by two people is irrelevant. What do you think would happen if Miles and Karpov played a 20 game match with Miles as Black only being allowed to play 1...a6 every game? It would be a bloodbath Korch.
Statistics are there for a reason. If I showed you 5 games where White won 3 and claimed he scored 60%, then it would be mea ...[text shortened]... o work. To be frank, I'm not completely sure why you haven't been kicked off the site yet.
Originally posted by !~TONY~!A reference to game in which World champion was beaten is nothing of course 😀
A reference to one game played by two people is irrelevant. What do you think would happen if Miles and Karpov played a 20 game match with Miles as Black only being allowed to play 1...a6 every game? It would be a bloodbath Korch.
Statistics are there for a reason. If I showed you 5 games where White won 3 and claimed he scored 60%, then it would be mea o work. To be frank, I'm not completely sure why you haven't been kicked off the site yet.
Actually Miles have been played also other unorthodox openings (like 1...b6) against Karpov with decent results in opening. So I doubt if their result would be worse than result of their games in "normal" openings.
I pay attention to results played by experts of current opening - low percentage can be explained by fact that in many cases these openings are often played by players who are not so familiar with these positions and play them only to confuse opponent.
You have showed yourself to be person with lack of chess knowledge (to say nothing about your personal qualities).
Originally posted by KorchBut a rapid game played by two world class players (one a championship contender) means nothing? Both players in that game certainly play better chess than Miles. Unless you can prove to me that all 91 games were played by people who had no idea what they're doing, then I'll still hold 1...a6 to be crap. In fact, I would say that players playing 1...a6 are more likely to have prepared the lines deeply. Most players who play weird openings tend to fervently defend them and prepare them well to try to make up for the theoretical disadvantage.
A reference to game in which World champion was beaten is nothing of course 😀
Actually Miles have been played also other unorthodox openings (like 1...b6) against Karpov with decent results in opening. So I doubt if their result would be worse than result of their games in "normal" openings.
I pay attention to results played by experts of current openi ...[text shortened]... self to be person with lack of chess knowledge (to say nothing about your personal qualities).
Originally posted by !~TONY~!Both players of that Rapid game were certainly weaker than Karpov. And if weaker player (Miles) - expert of unorthodox openings beats in serious game certainly better player (Karpov) then its serious argument in favour of this "crap".
But a rapid game played by two world class players (one a championship contender) means nothing? Both players in that game certainly play better chess than Miles. Unless you can prove to me that all 91 games were played by people who had no idea what they're doing, then I'll still hold 1...a6 to be crap. In fact, I would say that players playing 1...a6 are ...[text shortened]... ervently defend them and prepare them well to try to make up for the theoretical disadvantage.
Preparation may not help you much if you dont "feel" these positions. Such unorthodox openings are not for everyone - they are created for unorthodox players like Miles and Basman and not for solid orthodox players like Karpov.
That`s the reason why I`ve never suggested that everyone must play them - in my opinion everyone should play openings which suits with individual playing style.
By the way - in that rapid game it seems obvious that Kamsky was not familiar with this opening - he should have been played Nc6 in 8th or at least in 10th move. Also I`m sure that experts of this opening (like Miles for example) would definitely play 12....h5 instead of 12...g6? after which white got large advantage.
Tony & Korch you are both under 28 - you were not born when Tony Miles play 1...a6.
For months, nay years afterwards everybody was playing it...and losing.
You had to be there - it was terrible.
There are some impressionable players on here, they will see your posts,
start playing the bloody thing and this time next week the threads will be.
1...a6 Hey I won a game!!
1...a6 Anybody got any analysis?
1...a6 the refutation
1...a6 the anti-refutation
Come and join the 1...a6 Clan
I urge you to desist. Talk about the Lopez, Isolated Queen Pawns, Endings
(no forget endings), King-side v Queen-side attacks...anything but 1...a6.
I think that Korch's point is that unorthodox moves can be effective, particularly in OTB, for all the (good) reasons that he gave.
I think that GP's point was that there is nothing magic about a6 so don't beat a dead horse.
I think the lack of civility is unbecoming of you both. Beers on me. Chill.
Tony, when you say not to be rude...but...and then be rude...you are contradicting yourself by trying to excuse yourself with this disclaimer (telling people that they are wasting the chess universe's time).
I believe that Korch was mocking this in his next post, but is equally rude.
No need to ruin/hijack an interesting thread by telling somone that they're an idiot, bore, etc. Criticism can direct and polite at the same time.
I'm having some Pilsner Urquell, what would you fellows like?
Originally posted by greenpawn34It`s because they did play 1...a6 with 2...b5? - they should have play 2...h6! 😀
Tony & Korch you are both under 28 - you were not born when Tony Miles play 1...a6.
For months, nay years afterwards everybody was playing it...and losing.
You had to be there - it was terrible.
There are some impressionable players on here, they will see your posts,
start playing the bloody thing and this time next week the threads will be.
...[text shortened]... Queen Pawns, Endings
(no forget endings), King-side v Queen-side attacks...anything but 1...a6.
Originally posted by diskamylSo what? White may have the very slightest of edges in the initial chess setup. Even if it doubles, it's still infinitesimal.
I'm not even close to your stage, but I really can't believe you're advocationg for 1...a6. The idea behind that move itself is that it's crap.
It's simply (by objective logic) almost equal to "being black" a second time.