17 Dec 13
Originally posted by greenpawn34Hi greenpawn, I agree about the second half of the game. Thanks for posting the game, as I can see myself having done what black did. I've tried it out once so far in a pub game (white did 7. Bg5 as I'd told him the three or four moves of theory I know about) and I lost in a messy position. That move (7. Bc4) isn't on my database (which is missing lots of stuff as I'm fairly lazy about updating it), it has a handful of games with 7. Bg5 and 7. Bc1.
Jeezy peeps DeepThought, that game you posted....
The last half was so dull I could hear my hair grow. And that opening?
[pgn]
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Be3 Ng4 {And I don't care who they are, what they are, where they are from or what theory probably says. You cannot spend 3 tempi....} 7. Bc4 Nxe3 8. fxe3 {....chopping ...[text shortened]... the Rook sac could have been played by any 1800 player with an ounce of tactical ability.}[/pgn]
I gave the position after 7. Bc4 to Crafty (I have no in progress games in this line) and it gives the initially implausible looking 7. ... e5 after a couple of minutes with an advantage to white of +0.3 ish. The engine prepares castling before swapping off the knight - I checked and it gives 8. Nf5 Bxf5 and 8. Bxf7 Kxf7 as well as 8. Nb3 Be7 9. Bxf7 Kxf7 as good for black (-1.5 ish). Based on this black can reach a fairly normal position and avoid the English Attack, with the caveats that engines are notoriously bad at openings, the bishop on c4 could still be trouble, and positions engines think are playable aren't necessarily easy for humans to play.
If I think I'm more likely to win using a natural line I'd use that. I'm planning to use this where I've got some reason to think I stick with the normal defence I'll be crushed - primarily when my opponents are about 25 to 50 ECF grading points higher than me (ELO 200 to 400).
18 Dec 13
Originally posted by DeepThoughtHere's the field, according to what I've read:
Why won't he be invited to play there? He should get an automatic place as he is #4 in the world, the three highest rated players other than the champion are automatic entrants.
1. Vladimir Kramnik (World Cup Champion)
2. Dmitry Andreikin (World Cup Finalist)
3. Veselin Topalov (Grand Prix Champion)
4. Shakhriyar Mamedyarov (Grand Prix #2)
5. Levon Aronian (Rating #1)
6. Sergey Karjakin (Rating #2)
7. Magnus Carlsen or Vishy Anand (Loser of the upcoming World Championship)
The last spot will go to the organizer of the 2014 Candidates Tournament (with minimum rating of 2725)
18 Dec 13
Originally posted by dryhumpWhat tournament is this? When and where?
Here's the field, according to what I've read:
1. Vladimir Kramnik (World Cup Champion)
2. Dmitry Andreikin (World Cup Finalist)
3. Veselin Topalov (Grand Prix Champion)
4. Shakhriyar Mamedyarov (Grand Prix #2)
5. Levon Aronian (Rating #1)
6. Sergey Karjakin (Rating #2)
7. Magnus Carlsen or Vishy Anand (Loser of the upcoming World Championship)
The ...[text shortened]... st spot will go to the organizer of the 2014 Candidates Tournament (with minimum rating of 2725)
18 Dec 13
2 edits
Originally posted by RBHILLIt is only two on rating alone, dryhump has it right I think, the relevant tournament is the candidates tournament itself. There's 8 places, one of which is in the gift of the organizer of the candidates tournament (as I read it). The selection rules are on page 1 of this document: http://www.fide.com/FIDE/handbook/regscandidates2014.pdf
What tournament is this? When and where?
18 Dec 13
1 edit
Hi DeepThought
I'd refrain from giving positions to computers.
You have to decide for yourself if you think you can play the position.
It will not come up with any of the sub 2000 half baked ideas that in practice work.
The point I'm making is that you had to be a very good player to play
the Black side of the Najdorf both theoretically and in calcualtion.
You give up so much opening tempo and every 1.e4 player I know has
a per line v the Naj. and there are dozens of ways to play against it.
They will know every little trick in the book and some that are not even in the book.
It's not a self-confessed lazy man's opening. 🙂
19 Dec 13
Originally posted by greenpawn34To be honest it's pretty rare I get to play it otb - I think I've had it once in the London League against someone rated about 167 (~1900ish) and lost against the attack I use against it - most players under about 150 try some sort of anti-Sicilian. I've played the Najdorf for about 20 years, so I'm fairly confident with it against players I can realistically expect to get something from the game against - if they're that much stronger than me I'll probably lose whatever I play, also I've got the French defence as an alternative.if I find myself consistently losing with it otb.
Hi DeepThought
I'd refrain from giving positions to computers.
You have to decide for yourself if you think you can play the position.
It will not come up with any of the sub 2000 half baked ideas that in practice work.
The point I'm making is that you had to be a very good player to play
the Black side of the Najdorf both theoretically and in ...[text shortened]... book and some that are not even in the book.
It's not a self-confessed lazy man's opening. 🙂