Mini 686 - Chess Mafia (Done)

[veerus]

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: Qc4

[Pesco47]

A slight problem with that, black is not 'forced' to play Qd7 at all.

[veerus]

A slight problem with that, black is not 'forced' to play Qd7 at all.

Would could they do instead? Any other move likely loses a pawn.

[Pesco47]

Moving the king is still a valid possibility, probably to f7.

[veerus]

Which forfeits their castling... I'm ok with that.

[Pesco47]

I don't care whether or not they can castle either. I do care that we don't have a plan to force them into moves we want played.

[Indigo Heron]

Currently, I see that Qe5 forces us into a disadvantage. Qc4 would put pressure on their king, which would force them to make some decisive moves that could decide the game in our favour. No offence, TCN, but g3 is far too defensive and we are simply inviting trouble over.

[Lawrencelot]

I am willing to do either Qc4 or Qe5. I don't see g3 accomplishing anything.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Currently, I see that Qe5 forces us into a disadvantage. Qc4 would put pressure on their king, which would force them to make some decisive moves that could decide the game in our favour. No offence, TCN, but g3 is far too defensive and we are simply inviting trouble over.

See, my only problem is that no one has yet to produce a single tactical reason why g3 isn't good. Not a single line of moves. Nothing. So I don't see how so many of us have come to the conclusion that it's obviously bad.

Seriously. Show me why it doesn't work. Show me, specifically, the trouble 10. g3 invites over. I would love to be convinced. I've been asking to be convinced, for pages. No one has bit. Why, I can't say.

[veerus]

No one will show you a tactical reason for why g3 isn't good because

tactically

it'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.

[veerus]

where's our mod? I know he left for a while.. but he said he'd found a replacement.. can we get a vote count and prods?

[Pesco47]

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.

[Indigo Heron]

Not to mention that you were so strongly in favour of Qe5, but after my post, you (in Pesco's words) 'backtracked' after intimidating us with an alternative to Qe5 = scum win. The way you worded said attempt at us...if I didn't know any better, you were trying to get us to rush a decision.

[Goatrevolt]

g3 is not a bad play, but it's entirely a defensive move. I wish to maintain pressure on black, rather than give them opportunities to stabilize their kingside. I don't like to make moves I consider "filler" moves that don't really have any set goal they accomplish, but get made simply because they aren't "bad" moves, persay. g3 fits that criteria in my opinion. I don't really see what we intend to accomplish by playing g3, or where that gets us.

I want to look more into the castling variation of Qe5. I assumed black's response would be d6 or d5, and we had good plays to both of those, but if black instead castles, essentially giving up the pawn for a stronger position, we need to evaluate whether losing some positional strength for a pawn is worth it or not. If we can later equalize, then it's definitely worth it, otherwise, no.

[veerus]

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.

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?

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.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Why do all of you seem to be missing the damn point? 10. g3 is not about protecting the f4 pawn. It's about allowing us to play Bg2, giving us more control of the center of the board. We are terribly underdeveloped. Moving the queen for the next few moves while black develops just doesn't strike me as a great plan.

That's about what I have to say, other than

fos:veerus

.

[Gorrad]

Why do all of you seem to be missing the damn point? 10. g3 is not about protecting the f4 pawn. It's about allowing us to play Bg2, giving us more control of the center of the board. We are terribly underdeveloped. Moving the queen for the next few moves while black develops just doesn't strike me as a great plan.

That's about what I have to say, other than

fos:veerus

.

Sorry I haven't really been active, but I completely agree with TCS here. I've lost many games by rushing headfirst without keeping positioning in mind, and g3 sets us up for what I posted earlier. Moving our queen off the bat like this is only going to screw us over in the long run.

[Lawrencelot]

We are not severely underdeveloped. We got a queen and a horse there, black only got a horse, and our bishops attack way more spaces than black's. And if we move the queen to Qe5 our right bishop has a whole lot of range, while moving her to Qc4 keeps her protected by our right bishop. If you want the right bishop to develop, why waste two moves to let it attack a pawn and 1 space instead of doing one move that keeps pressure on black and also allows the bishop to move freely?

Move: Qe5

. As I said, I'm also willing to do Qc4. Btw, with so many people on the same side, it's hard to screw something up, so playing agressively is not a bad strategy.

[Gorrad]

Btw, with so many people on the same side, it's hard to screw something up, so playing agressively is not a bad strategy.

I completely disagree. Keep in mind, we have no secrets and a handful of our number are working against us. We have to work to see every strategy they're doing, while ours are wide open.

[Pesco47]

*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*/chess tag removed*

Reposting the board so we can see things in perspective.

Requesting the replacement mod make their presence known and do a vote/move count. And send some prods.

[Pesco47]

Case 1: Qc4
*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 d5
11. Qb5 Nd7
*/chess tag removed*

I don't see it ending well for us down this route. The queen gets trapped into permanently running while they get plenty of attacks in.

Case 2: Qe5
*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. Qe5 o-o
11. Bc4 d5
12. Bb3 Ng4
*/chess tag removed*

This looks like a fine position to ask 'Would you like to resign?' That d5 is a brilliant move and we get screwed over this badly.

Alternative : Bd2
*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. Bd2
*/chess tag removed*

How about this one?

[Lawrencelot]

Why not just take the pawn after Qe5?

*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. Qe5 O-O
11. Qxf5
*/chess tag removed*

After black's next move here, we'll most likely have to retreat with our queen, but that's no disaster as we're a pawn ahead.

Bd2, I don't know. It attacks a protected pawn, but it does allow us to castle.

[Gorrad]

I would be wary in that situation, Lawrence. If black moved their queen to a5 and managed to threaten e2, we'd lose.

[Pesco47]

I would be wary in that situation, Lawrence. If black moved their queen to a5 and managed to threaten e2, we'd lose.

If black went 11. ... Qa5, WE SCORE! They are not that stupid

[Gorrad]

I would be wary in that situation, Lawrence. If black moved their queen to a5 and managed to threaten e2, we'd lose.

If black went 11. ... Qa5, WE SCORE! They are not that stupid

Well hey! Thanks for pointing that out to them.