Mini 686 - Chess Mafia (Done)
-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
Hey guys. I've been following the game since about day 3 or so and was hoping I'd be able to replace in as I love chess. So here I am, thanks mod for taking me!
I must say I haven't been too happy with white's play so far and I'll do my best to try and improve that as we enter the middle game. I will review the options and make a move vote tonight.. please don't move until I post again later.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
Ok, i've finished re-reading and making notes. Before I post some analysis in the next post, I have a couple of questions for themod.
1) What happens when the game ends in a draw?
2) Rules indicate that if equal # of players/mafia is present, mafia wins. I disagree with his as the town still has a chance to win the chess game. Just wanted to make sure that this was considered...On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
Ok, here's my analysis up to this point:
1. e4 c5 -- e4 was a good opening as it lends itself to more tactical and open games which in such a move-by-committee setup is significantly better than the closed positions that 1. d4 creates
2. Nc3 Nc6 -- meh.. while Nc3 is less popular, it is also less aggressive and less "sound". There's a reason why Nf3 is the more popular move...
3. f4 e6 -- f4 is a poor move against sicilian as it opens the king for nothing instead of Nf4 to fight for control of the center.
4. Nf3 f5 5. exf5 exf5 -- more or less forced by the poor choice of 3. f4
6. Qe2 Be7 -- ?? Qe2?? and slow white's development to a screeching hault??FOS: SensFanfor first suggesting it, though his 7. Qe3 follow-up is decent (but the whole move sequence is wasteful).. 6. Bc4 was best here.
7. Nd5 Nb4 -- ?? why waste a move and attack a piece that'squadruple(!)protected without a means to follow up??FOS: Pescofor first suggesting it.. You guys should've continued with 7. Qe3 to free up the bishop.. SensFan, why did you abandon this line??
8. Nxb4 cxb4 -- forced
9. d4 Nf6 -- Qe5!! sigh...
Ok so here we are.. not all is lost, though our position is in shambles. The white squared bishop has nowhere to go. The black squared bishop has nowhere to go as well now that 9. d4 took away the fianchetto option. I strongly advise those voting 10. g3 to reconsider. Our own pawn on d4 takes away the effectiveness of the bishop on b2.
So the question is how do we free up our bishops and keep the pressure on the e-file? Simple:
move: 10. Qe5
Here's why:
10. Qe5 attacks the pawn on f5 and keeps the pin on the bishop on e7. After that we can follow up with 11. d5 which frees up the fianchetto option again. Getting the queen out of the way also gives us some options with placement of the white squared bishop and subsequent castling.
10. Qb5 and 10. Qc4 are both wasteful moves. Especially Qb5 since Qe5 is much better becuase it still attacks the f5 pawn and keeps the pin. Qc4 is good if you wanted to force a queen trade (10. Qc4 d5 11. Qb4+ Qd7) but given how active our queen is compared to how immobile black's queen is, we don't want to trade. The time to attack is now.
I must say that whoever ends the day by moving Qc4 without a really good counter to my suggest and finishes off the day should be considered as #1 scum suspect whos lynch should immediately follow.
Also, while I'm at it, here is the list of people who have dominated my notes so far by making the most "bad" suggestions for white:
IH, Gorrad and Pesco.
SensFan deserves special mention for convincing the town to play the restricting 6. Qe2 and then not following up with his own plan of 7. Qe3.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
Actually I believe you were the only one to mention it early on.. you just didn't look at it hard enough. Qe5 is obviously not as good as it would've been on the last move when we would've won a pawn (at least), but it is still our best move.Goatrevolt wrote:I can't believe I didn't even consider Qe5.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
IH, 10...0-0 is followed by 11.Qxf5. That's the point.
I realize that you weren't the only one who voted for the move to happen. My fos is based on the fact that you were the first one to suggest it thus planting the seed for further discussion. That and the subsequent failure to follow up with Qe3 are my only dings against you at the moment. In fact, you didn't even make a case for it, opting to move quickly with Nd5 which, if nothing else, at least planted a seed of doubt in my mind that your original suggestion was geniune. Care to explain what changed your mind?SensFan wrote:
That's complete bullshit. First of all, 51%+ agreed with the move, plan on FoSing them, too? Next, explain exactly what the problem is with pinning the Black Bishop to e7.veerus wrote:6. Qe2 Be7 -- ?? Qe2?? and slow white's development to a screeching hault??FOS: SensFanfor first suggesting it, though his 7. Qe3 follow-up is decent (but the whole move sequence is wasteful).. 6. Bc4 was best here.
Anyway, here's why I have a problem with 6. Qe2:
1) it blocked our white squared bishop which hampered development and easy castling
2) the pin did not accomplishanything.. in fact, if there's one thing it accomplished is wasted a move for white while "forcing" black to play a natural move that would allow for quicker castling (as evidenced by the current position)
3) it broke one of the cardinal rules of chess -- we brought the queen out too early (read: before our minor pieces are developed) and paid dearly for it in development. Look at the position right now -- black can castle on its next move while it would take us *3* moves to achieve the same. 10. Qe5 allows us to catch up a bit by making one of those 3 moves with tempo.
Also, Pesco, when I looked through the game, I noted when you (and others) suggested poor movesat that timethus my comments were not based on the current position.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
I'm about | | this close from voting you. I'm still giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're just bad at chess.Pesco47 wrote:Back onto the move at hand please.
How I'm seeing the Qe5 sequence:
10. Qe5 d6
11. Qb5+ Bd7
From here taking b7 results in black getting the advantage of development in the trades.
If we go
12. Qxb4 Nd5
Move 13 will be irrelevant since black can now call check from both sides of the board. g3 is by far the safest move we can play.Unmove, Move g3
Taking on both b7 or b4 would give us a free pawn. After 12. Qxb4 Nd5, there are numerous GREAT replies with Qxb7 being best of the bunch and putting is up 2 pawns.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
Not to beat a dead horse, but this also counts as fools mate. Regardless, e4, Bc4, Qf3 (not Qh5) is a valid opening with wild tactical possibilities that I've used effectively in the past. Point is, in this case the opening is designed to to use the queen as a main weapon for quick tactical strikes (primarily the constant mate on f7) and general disarray. In the opening the town has chosen (and most openings in general), the queen is intended to be developed after castling and placing most/all minor pieces into more productive squares (ie.. during the middle game).SensFan wrote:
Fine. What about 1. e4 e5 2. bc4 bc5 3. qh5 Nf6 4. Qxf7#The Central Scrutinizer wrote:That was poorly worded. I'm pretty sure you can't use fool's mate to demonstrate that a general rule of playing good chess is wrong... because no one even remotely mediocre is going to play that opening for white.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
Yes. Several in fact:The Central Scrutinizer wrote:Is there a reason that we're choosing to play hyperaggressive? Just in general, almost everyone seems to be in tune with shoving our queen out there without the benefit of careful development.
1) We are behind in development, therefore the time for "careful development" has passed.
2) Qc4 leads to a likely queen exchange which will only highlight our lag in development since our queen is the only active piece we have.
3) Qb5 is just a lesser and poorer Qe5.
4) g3,currently, would be a wasted move. Generally, the fianchetto is used so we can park a bishop on the g2 square so it oversees the long diagonal. As long as our pawn is on d4, the bishop (and the previous g3) will be wasted.
5) Qe5 is simply thebestmove we have. It attacks an unprotected pawn and it stops black from completing its development for one move while bringing us one more closer to the same objective.
And yes, you're right.. it is scholar's mate.. that name escaped me..On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
IH.. this is the first highly useful post I've seen you make all game. I did not see 11....d5. The only change in your diagram that I would make is 14. Qb3, but I agree with the rest of the analysis and will have to consider if this position is better than the one resulting from Qc4. From looking at it right now, Qc4 does look better... I'll sleep on it. More to come tomorrow.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
Only have a minute.. will post more later, but I'd like to see what others think. The continuation to Qe5 as shown isn't terrible but it is no longer as attractive as I once thought.
And no, Pesco, I'm not backtracking, I just thought black's best option would be to protect the pawn (with g6, d6 or d5) and not castle and then try to equalize as you've demonstrated. We still come away a pawn ahead, but the question now is whether or not that is worth leaving our king open in the middle of the board. The other continuations (g6, d6, d5) do not lead to such active piece play by black.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
Ok, I've thought it over and while I still believe that Qe5 is best and leads to more complications, in a game where moves are made by committee with several people self-admittedly not being very good (and two having a hidden agenda), introducing complications may not be the best route.
Therefore, I will vote for simplifying the position by forcing a queen trade.
*chess tag removed*[White Everyone][Black ? and ?]e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 f4 e6 Nf3 f5 exf5 exf5 Qe2 Be7 Nd5 Nb4 Nxb4 cxb4 d4 Nf6 Qc4 d5 Qb5 Qd7 Qxd7 Bxd7 Bd3*/chess tag removed*
Unmove; move: Qc4On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
No one will show you a tactical reason for why g3 isn't good becausetacticallyit's not terrible. However, strategicially, it's awful. We are entering the middle stage of the game with our king in a very vulnerable position. We need to get our king to safety and moving our queen and bishop out of the way should be our priorities to allow for castling..
The only other thing I would support is Bd2 so we can long-castle next move. However I have reservations about that as it still keeps our position cramped.
Why do you want to move g3 so bad? Not only is that pawn NOT under attack, it is also protected by the c1 bishop.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
I thought I explained why g3 is bad? What move are you talking about? And why are you pointing fingers instead of providing counter-analysis?Pesco47 wrote:You keep saying we need to castle and protect the king, and yet you refuse to play a defensive move. If there is anything genuinely wrong with a move in any way, just saying that it's bad without telling why makes you very obvscum.
We need to keep our king safe. That should be our #1 priority since we are already behind on development. That's the definition of being "defensive". And g3 is not defensive.. it's passive.. "filler" as Goat puts it. It protects a pawn that's not under any attack. While still keeping our king in a dangerous situation in the middle of the board. In fact, if we do g3 and black castles, we'll *HAVE* to move our queen next or risk it getting pinned against the king by the rook.
Why not move the queen now and gain some momentum in the process while we still can? To me, we have to move the queen now.. it's just a matter of where. Qe5 looked best (and still does to me) however black castling as a response is not something I expected. It complicates the position though we come away with a pawn. If we can't come to an agreement on a simple strategic decision as getting our king to safety, I can't imagine getting anywhere once the position becomes complicated. Therefore, Qc4+ is best given the circumstances.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
According to the old mod's post in the mini-theme thread, our replacement mod isPesco47 wrote:Requesting the replacement mod make their presence known and do a vote/move count. And send some prods.MafiaSSK. I will PM him.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
Probably not a bad idea.. The game really stagnated in the last week or two. I'm in another game that Sensfan is modding and he hasn't been heard from in like a week, so a replacement or two may be in order as well.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
Our mod hadn't been heard from in over a week too so I wasn't really expecting a sudden replacement out of nowhere. :p Wb.SensFan wrote:
Oh, of course, replace SensFan. Don't bother prodding him, since Mister veerus obviously knowbs best...veerus wrote:Probably not a bad idea.. The game really stagnated in the last week or two. I'm in another game that Sensfan is modding and he hasn't been heard from in like a week, so a replacement or two may be in order as well.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
Dude, chill, it's not like you were posting, so I misspoke and said replacement instead of prod. I didn't mean anything by it. Besides, did I complain about YOUR game? It's a great concept! What's with all the anger?SensFan wrote:You shouldn't have been expecting a reaplcecement PERIOD. And I was never gone anywhere.
Seriously, its ungrateful assholes like yourself that make me regret putting hours into set-ups.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
Next few moves will likely be semi-forced, so hopefully we'll be able to go through them a bit faster.sirdanilot wrote:
Sadly, this is what happens with long days like this one. People lose interest and decide 'whatever, I just want to see something happen'.Gorrad wrote:Screw it. I hope y'all have a plan.Vote: Qc4
Let's try not to let it get this far next day, people.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
This makes sense.. sort of. However this would put our pawn on d5 under a lot of pressure from ..b5, Qb3The Central Scrutinizer wrote:move:d5
Our goal this move is to prevent 11. ...d5, which makes our last move worth even less. If black moves 11. d5 b5, then now the queen can move to d4, preserving our ability to develop the bishop. And then black will castle at 12, of course. But I hate to say I told you so.
Another thing to consider is that there is no threat to the queen right now. We should continue with our plan of developing the white-squared bishop.. in this case to either e2 or d3 so we can castle when able. I like Be2 better because if our queen is attacked, we can retreat to d3 and stay near the middle of the board as compared to on the edge of it if we move Bd3, Qb3.
move: Be2On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
...then what? Black's best response is d6. Our pawn on d5 will be like the living dead after that. We can't reliably protect it and black can snap it off at any time after Bd7.
It also frees up the a7-g1 diagonal (the place where our king will be when we castle) for attacks by the queen or the black squared bishop.
Another potentially dangerous reply by black that I just thought of is Qc7 threatening Bc5 and completely driving us into disarray.
I am also against castling on the queen side. Black's pawns are breathing down our neck on that side and the c-file is open for black to pressure us with rooks.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
Asirdanilot wrote:
*chess tag removed*veerus wrote:
It's a continuation move after Qc4. We develop our bishop and castle king-side when possible.sirdanilot wrote:I don't see the merit of Be2?
1. e4 c5
2. Nc3 Nc6
3. f4 e6
4. Nf3 f5
5. exf5 exf5
6. Qe2 Be7
7. Nd5 Nb4
8. Nxb4 cxb4
9. d4 Nf6
10. Qc4 a6
11. Be2
*/chess tag removed*
Then what, ...b5 or ...d5 are looming. And the bishop is still not developed until it moves to Bd3 or we move the knight away, or the queen. Maybe it's just because I think too short term, but I still don't see the merit of this move, other than the castling at kingside but that hardly warrants a move if there's no other merit.bigpart of why we moved 10. Qc4 is to move our bishop out so we are able to castle. Since our queen is not in any danger, there's absolutely no reason not to continue with our original plan while still delaying black castling. In response to ...b5 or ...d5, we would simply move Qd3 and be able to castle at will after that. Bottom line is that we need to castle to get our king to safety and castling queenside is a suicide due to the open c-file and pawn on b4.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
It's a bad move.. It moves the queen to the corner of the board where it becomes largely useless.
TCS: I'm not very happy with your right now. You are blatantly disregarding king safety in a key junction of the game. Not only that, you're advocating a move that shuts down the diagonal that stares down into the heart of black's position and makes our last move a complete waste. Especially since Qc4 was not a waste, and since the queen is not under attack, we need to get the king out of the middle of the board before it's too late.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
The b4 pawn can be easily protected by a5 or Qb6. However, for the purposes of development, I suppose I could get behind Bd2 as long as we agree that castling queen-side is a BAD BAD idea and the f1 bishop will need to be developed sooner than later.
TCS, you're really tickling my spider sense right now. You propose risky and complicated moves and suicidal castling ideas. You don't want to go over lines because you know they're unneccesarily complicated and unsound. And what's with the draw talk?On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
Is our queen under attack? -no. So why is it bad that our queen is where it is? It's safe with no chance of getting trapped and it's stopping black from castling.
If we move d5, black will answer with d6 and then our pawn will be LOST. Do YOU want to be down a pawn and in an inferior position?.. apparently so, if you're SCUM. And the fact that you're driving so hard at that makes me think that you ARE scum. You voting me for essentially wanting to keep our king SAFE is doubly so.
I know this is an omgus vote, but because you beat me to it by voting me with your next scummy post shouldn't stop me from doing what I wanted to do last post --vote: TCSOn a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
Well, ok, d6 itself wouldn't neccesarily play out right away, but the point is that the pawn would be in no-man's land. For example, the bishop could occupy the d6 square just as easily. Or this:
*chess tag removed*
1. e4 c5
2. Nc3 Nc6
3. f4 e6
4. Nf3 f5
5. exf5 exf5
6. Qe2 Be7
7. Nd5 Nb4
8. Nxb4 cxb4
9. d4 Nf6
10. Qc4 a6
11. d5 b5
12. Qb3 Bb7
*/chess tag removed*
Then how do you save it?
The point is.. black wouldn't let us get the pawn to d6, and on d5, the pawn would block the diagonal to where the king would be if black castled and we wouldn't be able to unblock it. And also, the pawn on d5 would be at the mercy of black after a similar sequence of moves to those shown above. It also opens up the a7-g1 diagonal for black making our castling options on the king-side look as dreary as those on the queen-side. We can not let that pawn go and lose it. If we do, we will forfeit whatever presense we have in the center of the board and lose the game.
It is a fundamental rule of chess that the king is safer when it's castled and not when it's in the middle of the board. The fact that you are trying to suggest everything BUT trying to get the king to safety tells me that you may have alterior motives.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
Goat, 12...d6 fails due to Qxb4. And 12. Qd4 does not prevent us from losing the pawn after 12...Bb7.
Yes, our king is MUCH safer castled. And due to our position beind under-developed, we may not have enough time to get him to safety when the king does come under pressure. But if you want to take that line of reasoning, our queen is not under attack either. Why is there such a push for d5 as a knee-jerk reaction to protect the queen fromIs our king in danger? Is he safer castled? Until a point where our king is in danger, or we need to get that rook in play, castling is unimportant.futureattacks?
Pesco: Back-rank mates happen when you suck at chess and/or you're not paying attention. The odds of that mate happening in this game are 0 due to its structure. Besides, with the current pawn structure, a back-rank mate isn't even possible since the king can get off the back rank from the square it lands on after the castling.
I'll repeat again -- queenside castling would lead to a fiery doom. It is an open file for black who could put tremendous pressure on the king's position after moves like Qb7 and Rb8.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
1. By not taking up e2 which could be occupied by the queen (don't know why though)sirdanilot wrote:What does Bd2 do for us? Nothing, does it? Let me dig up a post of mine.
Could we continue this discussion?sirdanilot wrote:
1. How?goatrevolt wrote:2. A better option is Bd2. It doesn't restrict our queen, (1)develops the other bishop, (2)threatens the b4 pawn, (3)and still allows us to castle, just via queenside. (4)Castling is also going to be more effective, since castling to the kingside would involve also having a bishop at e2, effectively keeping the rooks from getting into the game for a while.
2. That's pretty nice indeed, but ...a5 would stop that
3. So does Be2?
4. Not following about the rooks part.
2. That's ok though.. it's still a development move for us.
3. Be2 allows castling king-side which is a much better option
4. When we do castle king-side, there won't be a bishop on c1 instantly conecting the rooks as soon as we castle.
That being said, I'll repeat my earlier sentiment. I am ok with Bd2 if we do NOT castle queenside.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
Your analysis makes Bd2 less appealing than I thought it was.
What about a4? If black chooses to en passant, we will free up some of the congestion on the queen side. If they choose not to, the only way to attack the queen will be d5 which isn't exactly terrible for us. Well, except for making the e4 square inaccessible to white.. Hmm.. not sure I like that.
Another option is c3.
QFT.Indigo Heron wrote:However, anyone wishing to chase after 11. d5, please reconsider. It's a bad move, and believe me when I say that we'll be forced to resort to lynchings to win.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
Why? The queen will not be under attack, therefore black has no reason to move d5. After such a passive and tempo-giving move, black would be better off continuing development with b5. If we keep mucking around with our queen, the eventual sequence of Bb7-Bd5 will ruin any hopes of winning.
Also, keep in mind, as your move 12 implies, d5 allows us to park a knight on e5 without an easy way to get it off.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
QFT.The Central Scrutinizer wrote:People... we cannot plan eight moves ahead. Black can. What move gives us the best position? Stop thinking in terms of plans and start thinking in terms of board position, points of power, and the center... in other words, we need to play hypermodern.
And d5 does NOT give us the best position.. so why are you voting for it? I like my vote on you, scum.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
Pesco, I'm convinced you're scum. In addition to voting for moves through most of the game without much of a reason, you rarely give analysis and now you have asked for a deadline at a key junction in the game to hurry the town into making the wrong decision. This is about as anti-town as it gets.
unvote; vote: Pesco47On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
I'll agree with you there. I was thinking that too. The game would benefit from a clock, maybe with incremental moves (as in 2 months + 1 week for each move made or something).Pesco47 wrote:As an aside to the lack of activity in this game, I think it's a design flaw that some sort of chess clock system wasn't implemented to keep the players participating.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
Obviously the design is flawed. But it is also first of its kind, so if anyone runs another one (I might at a later date), it would be wise to include a chess clock deadline of sorts to ensure games don't drag.
Now, can we get back to the game? I think all the alternative moves have been shown to be inadequate and still stand by my Be2.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
Yay, fresh blood. Hopefully this will liven up the discussion somewhat.
To me, he's agreeing with me saying that d5 is a bad move because of d6.Lawrencelot wrote:
Help out a foreigner here: does that mean you think d5 is obviously the best move, or that only noobs would play d5 (and thus it's a bad move)?Indigo Heron wrote:Ditto d6 as well for me. d5 is just a no-brainer.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
12...Nxd5 and we lose the pawn.SensFan wrote:Am I missing something. 11...Qa5 12. b3 allows us to fianchetto our Bishop, and locks in their Queen behind the Pawn.
As much as you people seem to think otherwise, we NEED to devellop our Bishops, then castle AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
I knew there was a reason why d5 was bad (besides the d5 hanging there). Qa5 kills that idea sooner than b5, Bb7...
I still say Be2, then we castle, then we think about our attacking options with the king safe. Sensfan, fianchetto isn't beneficial to us right now. Black diagonal is too clogged up by our own pieces (queen would lose a possible open square with the pawn on b3) and white diagonal would weaken the king-side to the point where castling may no longer be safe.
Also, I think I've seen enough of Pesco's non-commital illogical explanations. In that position, the queen has more than 2 weak squares to land on, and wide open spaces never look like a bad end. Plus we're about equally developed and the position is closer to = instead of -/+. They give us more room to maneuver and make the right tactical decision.
unvote; vote: Pesco47We are in a bad enough position where no move is a great move and most lead to worse positions. Pretty sure us beginning to lose the game was the agreed point at which we would start lynching.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
The position that I referred to as = occured after a sequence of moves shown to be as inferior for black, thus the two bolded parts don't really relate to each other since black is unlikely to make an inferior move.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
Qb3 is ineffective and wasteful since our queen isn't under any pressure right now and will have that square to retreat to next move if we so desire.
Bd2 has been shown to lead to a huge advantage for black
Be2 is a safe move that allows us to get our king to safety on the king-side of the board where nothing is really going on.
How are the first two options better than Be2?? I don't understand.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
yes, i know he's coasting, but unlike you, he's not directly trying to throw the town off of the better movesPesco47 wrote:
You haven't answered this yet, Veerus.Pesco47 wrote:@ Veerus: Read all of sirdanilot's posts this game and tell me what he's posted.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
re-read IH's posts from around Dec 28. Black likely gains advantage in freedom over the board while most of our pieces become cramped.Lawrencelot wrote:Why weren't we doing Bd3 again?
And pesco, if I was scum in this game, I would try to shoot down better moves and promote worse ones (what you're doing). He's a non-factor in the move discussion, which means he's at least not trying to push us down the path of destruction, which at worse is just bad town play, not scummy.On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
Hm.. both Qb3 and Qd3 leave us in an equally undesirable situation. The following Qb3 follow-up will likely result in an exchange that will open up the board but will leave us a pawn down.. do we really want to do that? Or are those voting for Qb3 not planning on capturing the pawn next move?
Awesome Pants wrote:>Current chess board
On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008
Qd3 can be answered with d5 or g6. Black wouldn't castle.
Also, I didn't realize that in my earlier analysis, but AA is right - we are a pawn up before black gets that pawn back. My reservations about that position is that our king is under pressure from the black knight/queen combo. The position I posted puts us in a real jam after 17...Nxf4 or Qf2 depending on where the king moves. On the other hand, 17. Kd1 kind of neutralizes both of those moves at the cost of locking one of our rooks in the corner for a while which isn't great either... hmm (just thinking out loud here)
I guess the point is that both moves are bleak but there may be some hope for getting out of this jam in a few moves. I'm still torn between Qd3 and Qb3 as both delay black castling for a turn and put pressure on a different pawn. I've played out one possible scenario for Qb3. Still need to examine 12. Qb3 a5.
Also 12. Qd3 followed by g6, d5 and Bb7 (with the threat of Be4 if Qxf5)On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
-Fight Club-
-
veerus Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1050
- Joined: May 16, 2008