Spelersnaam: Wachtwoord:
Registratie voor nieuwe spelers
Toezichthouder: Walter Montego 
 Chess

Chess Discussion

For posting:
- invitations to games (you can also use the New Game menu or go straight to the Chess Invitation)
- information about upcoming tournaments
- discussion of games (please limit this to completed games or discussion on how a game has arrived at a certain position ... speculation on who has an advantage or the benefits of potential moves is not permitted)
- links to interesting related sites (non-promotional)


Forumlijst
Modus: Iedereen kan berichten achterlaten
Zoek in berichten:  

11. juli 2005, 14:07:48
Stormerne 
Onderwerp: Re: a good refutation . . .
Aangepast door Stormerne (11. juli 2005, 14:08:23)
ColonelCrockett: In my opinion, it depends on who you're playing. I'm a firm believer in playing the man not the board and over the board in matches (rather than here) that can be very effective.

I like to play 2...a6. That's partly because I used to play the 2...a6 O'Kelly variation in reply to 2.Nf3 throughout the 70s and 80s, even against people like James Plaskett, transposing into a Kan if white played c4. An early a6 is often effect as it often gets White out of his normal thinking. That can be good against bookish players or players stronger than you. Against a weaker player you might keep to more classical lines. Whatever you do, don't end up playing against yourself - always a danger with very tactical lines against a weak player when a simpler alternative would have done.

I'm pleased to see that 2...a6 still gets good stats here:
>http://www.chessgames.com/perl/explorer?node=33281&move=2.5&moves=e4.c5.Nc3&nodes=21720.32033.33281

though the sample is rather small. In any case it is NOT a refutation of 2.Nc3. I doubt there is one.

Datum en tijd
Aanwezige vrienden
Favoriete Forums
Genootschappen
Tip van de dag
Copyright © 2002 - 2024 Filip Rachunek, alle rechten voorbehouden.
Terug naar boven