02 Apr 08
2 edits
Originally posted by KorchI agree. but as far as preparation is concerned, I see tactical oversights as errors. during a game it's completely different, as the games of tal often demonstrate. complications can be too severe to work out in the time available, even if the refutation exists.
You should not underrate importance of tactics. As Tigran Petrosian once have said - tactic is the most important thing.
02 Apr 08
Originally posted by Mutt n StuFor Mac there is really only one option for GUI, Sigma Chess. It is available free but those who choose to pay the very reasonable licence fee get many more features. Sigma comes with its own engine that is moderately strong (it thrashes me 90% of the time) but can be a front end for any other UCI engine that has been ported to Mac.
What do you recommend? I like chessmaster for the tutorials but find its analysis quite cumbersome so looking to get some new software (preferably something that has a Mac version).
I see is some software you can load other engines? How does this work? E.g. I assume something like ChessBase can use a number of different engines and ChessBase is just t ...[text shortened]... above is correct then I guess there are 2 questions: what program should i use and what engine?
Sigma actually comes with HIARCS 11.2 but that needs to be paid for to unlock its full potential. You can download some UCI engines for free, Glaurung, Fruit, TogaII and GambitFruit are the examples I know of. The latest version of Fruit (2.3.1) is very strong and can compete with HIARCS. The only other sensible Mac engine plus GUI I know of is Shredder which is also not free. I don't think Rybka runs on Macs although if you have an Intel Mac you could always install Windows via Boot Camp and run it there.
02 Apr 08
Originally posted by wittywonka2 ....... Nc6 seems playable to me and appears 49 times in the Chessgames Opening Explorer. Against the most common response, 3 Nf3 it usually transposes to well known lines. 3 d4 is more of a direct challenge, but after 1. e4 c5 2. c3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. cxd4 d5 5. exd5 Qxd5 6. Nf3, Black's position certainly seems OK.
Well, 2. ... d5 is certainly a reasonable choice against the 2. c3 Variation, but 2. ... Nc6 is indeed strange. Of course, it is playable, but it certainly does concede the center rather quickly.
02 Apr 08
Originally posted by no1marauderi find the exact same data. brava!
2 ....... Nc6 seems playable to me and appears 49 times in the Chessgames Opening Explorer. Against the most common response, 3 Nf3 it usually transposes to well known lines. 3 d4 is more of a direct challenge, but after 1. e4 c5 2. c3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. cxd4 d5 5. exd5 Qxd5 6. Nf3, Black's position certainly seems OK.
02 Apr 08
Originally posted by eagleeye222001I never rely on the Fritz opening database; the online ones are obviously superior.
My experience with Fritz is that it labels some moves with a question mark when in fact the move is quite playable and okay. Some lines that Fritz gives as main line lose rather quickly or at the very least should have a question mark.
Bottom line. As already mentioned, do research.
02 Apr 08
Originally posted by eagleeye222001I think most players whom are serious about moving up, or are already stronger players have begun to build their own databases. I know mine is sitting around 75,000 games for my personal opening repertoire.
My experience with Fritz is that it labels some moves with a question mark when in fact the move is quite playable and okay. Some lines that Fritz gives as main line lose rather quickly or at the very least should have a question mark.
Bottom line. As already mentioned, do research.
05 Apr 08
Originally posted by Uries5...Bxf2+! with great counter-attacking prospects.
What does black do against Nxf7? incidently.
ie
Game 3727258
05 Apr 08
Originally posted by no1marauderI my opinion after 1. e4 c5 2. c3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. cxd4 d5 5. exd5 Qxd5 6. Nf3 e6 7.Nc3 (the best move) white has slight positional plus - I don`t think that Sicilian players would like to play positions like that.
2 ....... Nc6 seems playable to me and appears 49 times in the Chessgames Opening Explorer. Against the most common response, 3 Nf3 it usually transposes to well known lines. 3 d4 is more of a direct challenge, but after 1. e4 c5 2. c3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. cxd4 d5 5. exd5 Qxd5 6. Nf3, Black's position certainly seems OK.
05 Apr 08
2 edits
Originally posted by KorchIn general, I agree with you (I always play 2 .... Nf6) but there's 735 games on Chessbase's database with the line you give with what looks like pretty decent results for Black. So some Sicilian players don't mind playing it. Top US GM Larry Evans played it in London in 1988 against someone called Lalic.
I my opinion after 1. e4 c5 2. c3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. cxd4 d5 5. exd5 Qxd5 6. Nf3 e6 7.Nc3 (the best move) white has slight positional plus - I don`t think that Sicilian players would like to play positions like that.
EDIT: This year, Serbian Grandmaster Dusan Rajkovic scored a win as Black against FIDE Master Milan Markovic at the Winter Open in Belgrade opening with this line (by transposition). And last year in Buenos Aires, Argentinian IM Damian Lemos won with the same line (again by transposition) against Bolivian FIDE Master Borda.
05 Apr 08
Originally posted by no1marauderI know that there are GMs who don`t mind playing it. Here is the game of Korchnoi with Sveshnikov - one of the best 2.c3 experts.
In general, I agree with you (I always play 2 .... Nf6) but there's 735 games on Chessbase's database with the line you give with what looks like pretty decent results for Black. So some Sicilian players don't mind playing it. Top US GM Larry Evans played it in London in 1988 against someone called Lalic.
[Event "Biel izt"]
[Site "Biel izt"]
[Date "1993.??.??"]
[EventDate "?"]
[Round "9"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[White "Sveshnikov"]
[Black "Viktor Korchnoi"]
[ECO "B22"]
[WhiteElo "2570"]
[BlackElo "2625"]
[PlyCount "85"]
1. e4 c5 2. c3 d5 3. exd5 Qxd5 4. Nf3 Nc6 5. d4 Nf6 6. Be2 e6
7. O-O cxd4 8. cxd4 Be7 9. Nc3 Qd6 10. Nb5 Qd8 11. Bf4 Nd5
12. Bg3 O-O 13. Bc4 a6 14. Bxd5 axb5 15. Be4 Ra6 16. Qe2 f5
17. Bd3 Ra5 18. Rfd1 Nb4 19. Be5 Nxd3 20. Rxd3 Qd5 21. Ne1 Bd7
22. Rg3 Rf7 23. Nd3 Rxa2 24. Rc1 Ra6 25. Nf4 Rc6 26. Qd2 Rxc1+
27. Qxc1 Qc4 28. Rc3 Qa2 29. h3 Bc6 30. Rxc6 bxc6 31. Qxc6 h6
32. Qxb5 Bf6 33. Qe8+ Rf8 34. Qc6 Bxe5 35. dxe5 Qxb2 36. Qxe6+
Kh7 37. Ng6 Qb1+ 38. Kh2 Rd8 39. Qf7 Qc2 40. f4 Qe4 41. e6 Rd2
42. Nf8+ Kh8 43. Ng6+ 1/2-1/2
05 Apr 08
1 edit
Gererally I prefer books.
If you are using an engine I would imagine you need to slot in an opening DB so read DB instead of engine.
The trouble with DBs is they are (1) contaminated by games between lower ranking players and (2) have games played well by the loser who simply blundered [perhaps in time trouble] or lost on time when in a won position.
So the lines they give may not be best and need to be followed with caution. There is no better example than the gamesexplorer DB here at RHP where a lot of games are decided for reasons other than best play and where the rating you take as a guide may be totally wrong.
Books on the other hand explain the reasons behind a move and you are able to learn more about why a move is played. Of course you need to be cautious here also as a line may have subsequently been refuted. I have had many games played here where I followed a book line only to realise too late that it was no longer sound. Now I play a new (for me) line through making sure I am happy every step of the way and ensuring I like that final position and if the book says I am winning making sure I know how to. Where I don't like the final position I try and find a point to get my opponent out of his book even if this means making an inferior but not outright bad move. Unfortunately this takes time but it does get results. If you can come out of an opening "won" then you should win but if its "lost" you have a battle on your hands.
05 Apr 08
1 edit
Originally posted by Dragon FireOf course, a good opening book on a specific opening is best of all. But few have the wherewithal to have a complete library for all major openings (my own opening library concentrates heavily on Sicilian books) and general guides are of limited usefulness after the first few moves in most cases.
Gererally I prefer books.
If you are using an engine I would imagine you need to slot in an opening DB so read DB instead of engine.
The trouble with DBs is they are (1) contaminated by games between lower ranking players and (2) have games played well by the loser who simply blundered [perhaps in time trouble] or lost on time when in a won positio of an opening "won" then you should win but if its "lost" you have a battle on your hands.
And, of course, all database moves must be viewed with caution and you need to use your own chess knowledge in evaluating the resultant positions. Still they are useful in IDing candidate moves in the opening.