On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 22:59:46 -0800 (PST), Eli Kesef
<nastyhorsefork@gmail.com> wrote:

>Bs"d
>
>So in this game: https://lichess.org/tbJq9ykmfPd9 the enemy made an attempt to fry my liver.

No, he did not. Assuming you are referring to the "Fried Liver
Attack," this game has nothing to do with the Fried Liver Attack. As
I think I may have explained here before, 4. Ng5 is *not* the Fried
Liver Attack (aka Fegatello Attack). The Fegatello attack is the
sacrifice of the Knight with 6. Nxf7, after 4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5 Nxd5
(normally followed by 6. ...KxN 7. Qf3+ Kd6). If you don't play 4. ...
d5 5. exd5 Nxd5, White has no opportunity to attempt to "fry your
liver," as you put it.

> After a Petrov defense

Not to say "Petrov" is wrong, but in my day, that was almost always
spelled "Petroff." Perhaps "Petrov" is now more common; I don't know.

> we got the position of the Italian game with the two horses defense,

No, this is not the Italian game with the two horses defense, and not
even the Italian game with the Two Knights Defense. The Italian game
(aka Giuoco Piano; in my day it was always called the Giuoco Piano,
which means "Quiet Game") is 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc5 Bc5. If Black
doesn't play 3...Bc5, it is not the Giuoco Piano (Italian game). The
opening of your game is just called the Two Knights Defense. The Two
Knights Defense is *not* called the Two Knights Defense *to the
Italian game* or the Two Knights Defense to the Giuoco Piano.

By the way, the move normally considered best and most commonly played
after 4. Ng5 d5 is 5. ...Nh5 (avoiding the Fegatello Attack or the
perhaps better 6. d4), although back in my tournament-playing days, I
always preferred 5. ... Nd4, the Fritz Defense.

Since you like traps, I'll mention a common trap in the Fritz
Variation:

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Bc4 Nf6
4. Ng5 d5
5. exd5 Nd4 (the Fritz Variation)
6. d6?? Qxd6 (much better play is 6. c3 b5)
7. Nxf7 Qc6
8. Nxh8 Qxg2
9. Rh1 Qe4+
10. Be2 Nf3++

I've played and won the black side of that game many times.

And by the way, another trappy line in the Two Knights Defense is the
Wilkes-Barre Variation (aka Traxler Counterattack).

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Bc4 Nf6
4. Ng5 Bc5

You might like to look into playing that.

> and he put his horse on g5, and had a double attack on f7.
>
>So my horse on f6 jumped forward

A very agile horse. When you keep score do your write H instead of N
and C instead of R?

> and took his pawn on e4, which was defended by his horse on g5. But he didn't take my horse, but went for bigger game,
> and smacked in with his horse on f7, forking my queen and castle.
>
>I saved my queen and put her on h4, threatening mate on f2, and he castled.

You should be consistent in using the wrong terms and say he "rooked."

>Now the problem was, I had totally forgotten what to play now. Now black is supposed to sacrifice his horse on f2, and go on winning the game, but I had no idea, so I was on my own.

My opening books are very old, but the one I rely on (by Paul Keres)
says Black should play 6...Nf6 with advantage. Perhaps there are newer
better choices; I don't know.

On Sunday, February 6, 2022 at 8:21:35 PM UTC+2, Ken Blake wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 22:59:46 -0800 (PST), Eli Kesef
> <nastyho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Bs"d
> >
> >So in this game: https://lichess.org/tbJq9ykmfPd9 the enemy made an attempt to fry my liver.
> No, he did not. Assuming you are referring to the "Fried Liver
> Attack," this game has nothing to do with the Fried Liver Attack. As
> I think I may have explained here before, 4. Ng5 is *not* the Fried
> Liver Attack (aka Fegatello Attack). The Fegatello attack is the
> sacrifice of the Knight with 6. Nxf7, after 4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5 Nxd5
> (normally followed by 6. ...KxN 7. Qf3+ Kd6). If you don't play 4. ...
> d5 5. exd5 Nxd5, White has no opportunity to attempt to "fry your
> liver," as you put it.

Bs"d

Didn't we have this discussion before? You are probably right, but I think everybody knows what I mean, and that is that the enemy is trying to fork me on f7.

> > After a Petrov defense

I have some books on the Petrov, and in at least one it is spelled as "Petroff", but I'm not going to use 2 letters when I can use 1.

> Not to say "Petrov" is wrong, but in my day, that was almost always
> spelled "Petroff." Perhaps "Petrov" is now more common; I don't know.
> > we got the position of the Italian game with the two horses defense,
> No, this is not the Italian game with the two horses defense, and not
> even the Italian game with the Two Knights Defense. The Italian game
> (aka Giuoco Piano; in my day it was always called the Giuoco Piano,
> which means "Quiet Game") is 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc5 Bc5. If Black
> doesn't play 3...Bc5, it is not the Giuoco Piano (Italian game).

When I type “Giuoco Piano” I always write it wrong. For this one I used a copy & paste, otherwise I have to check it 4 to 13 times to get it right.
It is just too weird language.
“Italian opening” is so much easier. Therefore I prefer “Spanish” over Ruy Lopez.
That is how it is done in Europe, that’s what I’m used to, and that’s what I keep on doing.

But I got your point about the Italian, but what I meant was: White played the preliminary moves for the Italian. No, it wasn't a real Italian, but it was a real two horses defense.

> The
> opening of your game is just called the Two Knights Defense. The Two
> Knights Defense is *not* called the Two Knights Defense *to the
> Italian game* or the Two Knights Defense to the Giuoco Piano.
>
> By the way, the move normally considered best and most commonly played
> after 4. Ng5 d5 is 5. ...Nh5 (avoiding the Fegatello Attack or the
> perhaps better 6. d4), although back in my tournament-playing days, I
> always preferred 5. ... Nd4, the Fritz Defense.
>
> Since you like traps, I'll mention a common trap in the Fritz
> Variation:
>
> 1. e4 e5
> 2. Nf3 Nc6
> 3. Bc4 Nf6
> 4. Ng5 d5
> 5. exd5 Nd4 (the Fritz Variation)
> 6. d6?? Qxd6 (much better play is 6. c3 b5)
> 7. Nxf7 Qc6
> 8. Nxh8 Qxg2
> 9. Rh1 Qe4+
> 10. Be2 Nf3++

That's a humoristic one. I have played those, but not with the handle Carnivorum. At least I couldn't find them quickly.
Here are some of 'm:

https://lichess.org/OYQEe7Jf/black#20
https://lichess.org/WoGCaVJB/black
https://lichess.org/1TjxvsB3/black#20

I played this more often, but I don’t feel like digging them all up..

>
> I've played and won the black side of that game many times.
>
> And by the way, another trappy line in the Two Knights Defense is the
> Wilkes-Barre Variation (aka Traxler Counterattack).
>
> 1. e4 e5
> 2. Nf3 Nc6
> 3. Bc4 Nf6
> 4. Ng5 Bc5
>
> You might like to look into playing that.

When it is played against me, I hate it. I lose often against it, so I try to avoid it.

> > and he put his horse on g5, and had a double attack on f7.
> >
> >So my horse on f6 jumped forward
> A very agile horse. When you keep score do your write H instead of N
> and C instead of R?

No, I write P in stead of N, and T in stead of R. That’s because I use the Dutch initials, which is my native language.

P stands for “paard”, and that means horse. T stands for “toren” and that means tower.
> > and took his pawn on e4, which was defended by his horse on g5. But he didn't take my horse, but went for bigger game,
> > and smacked in with his horse on f7, forking my queen and castle.
> >
> >I saved my queen and put her on h4, threatening mate on f2, and he castled.
> You should be consistent in using the wrong terms and say he "rooked."

Sometimes I mix things up. I see that above I used “castle” and also “rook”.
Slip of the keyboard.

> >Now the problem was, I had totally forgotten what to play now. Now black is supposed to sacrifice his horse on f2, and go on winning the game, but I had no idea, so I was on my own.
> My opening books are very old, but the one I rely on (by Paul Keres)
> says Black should play 6...Nf6 with advantage. Perhaps there are newer
> better choices; I don't know.

I just checked Stockfish, and he says sacrifice your horse on f2, and he sets white on minus 3.5. So that is bad for white and as good as winning for black.

I got put on that Ponziano-Steinitz gambit by one of my trap books, written by two GM’s. But they give only one line. It was GM Igor Smirnov who gave me a whole repertoire in the Ponziano-Steinitz gambit. The only problem is to rember that whole repertoire. Here is GM Smirnov: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qyt01xy_ytg

https://tinyurl.com/castle-early

On Sun, 6 Feb 2022 14:56:48 -0800 (PST), Eli Kesef
<nastyhorsefork@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sunday, February 6, 2022 at 8:21:35 PM UTC+2, Ken Blake wrote:
>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 22:59:46 -0800 (PST), Eli Kesef
>> <nastyho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Bs"d
>> >
>> >So in this game: https://lichess.org/tbJq9ykmfPd9 the enemy made an attempt to fry my liver.

>> No, he did not. Assuming you are referring to the "Fried Liver
>> Attack," this game has nothing to do with the Fried Liver Attack. As
>> I think I may have explained here before, 4. Ng5 is *not* the Fried
>> Liver Attack (aka Fegatello Attack). The Fegatello attack is the
>> sacrifice of the Knight with 6. Nxf7, after 4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5 Nxd5
>> (normally followed by 6. ...KxN 7. Qf3+ Kd6). If you don't play 4. ...
>> d5 5. exd5 Nxd5, White has no opportunity to attempt to "fry your
>> liver," as you put it.
>
>Bs"d

What does Bs"d mean?

>Didn't we have this discussion before?

Could be. I don't remember. I post enough in the 20 or so newsgroups I
participate in that I forget a lot of what I've posted.

> You are probably right,

There's no "probably" here. I'm not always sure I'm right about
everything, but I'm sure about this.

> but I think everybody knows what I mean,

I think that the "everybody" you are referring to in this newsgroup
probably means only about two or three of us these days. But it
doesn't matter. Everybody knowing what you mean is no excuse for using
the wrong terminology. And even if *everybody* here knows what you
mean, it's always possible that someone new comes along and gets
confused by what you say. Correct terminology *is* important.

>and that is that the enemy is trying to fork me on f7.

No, "threatening to" is not the same as "trying to." I'm sure he was
well aware there are defenses to the threat and that you probably knew
at least one. Even though there are well-known defenses to it, 4. Ng5
is one of the two standard continuations (the other is 4. d4) in the
Two Knights Defense.

And he wasn't threatening to *fork* you, he was threatening to fuck
you by forking your Queen and Rook.

>> > After a Petrov defense
>
>I have some books on the Petrov, and in at least one it is spelled as "Petroff",

OK, I'm not surprised.

> but I'm not going to use 2 letters when I can use 1.

Your choice, of course. No big deal about that, When one language is
transliterated into another, not everyone does it the same way. As I
said below, "Not to say 'Petrov' is wrong."

>> Not to say "Petrov" is wrong, but in my day, that was almost always
>> spelled "Petroff." Perhaps "Petrov" is now more common; I don't know.
>> > we got the position of the Italian game with the two horses defense,
>> No, this is not the Italian game with the two horses defense, and not
>> even the Italian game with the Two Knights Defense. The Italian game
>> (aka Giuoco Piano; in my day it was always called the Giuoco Piano,
>> which means "Quiet Game") is 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc5 Bc5. If Black
>> doesn't play 3...Bc5, it is not the Giuoco Piano (Italian game).
>
>When I type “Giuoco Piano” I always write it wrong.

Understood. Many people spell it wrong.

> For this one I used a copy & paste, otherwise I have to check it 4 to 13 times to get it right.
> It is just too weird language.

Italian is much less weird than English. Unlike English, it is almost
completely phonetic. If you can say "giuoco" correctly (something like
dzhwo-ko), you can spell it correctly.

>“Italian opening” is so much easier.

It doesn't matter. Calling it "Italian opening" is common enough that
it is well understood.

>Therefore I prefer “Spanish” over Ruy Lopez.

But "Ruy Lopez" is easy to spell (and uses fewer keystrokes).

>That is how it is done in Europe, that’s what I’m used to, and that’s what I keep on doing.
>
>But I got your point about the Italian, but what I meant was: White played the preliminary moves for the Italian.

I knew what you meant, but that's not an excuse for writing the wrong
thing.

> No, it wasn't a real Italian, but it was a real two horses defense.

No, it wasn't. It was a real "Two Knights Defense." Yes, I understand
you when you call it "horse" instead of "knight" (or "castle" instead
of "rook"), but when you do that you come across as an ignorant
beginner at chess. If that's the picture you want to paint of
yourself, be my guest.

>> The
>> opening of your game is just called the Two Knights Defense. The Two
>> Knights Defense is *not* called the Two Knights Defense *to the
>> Italian game* or the Two Knights Defense to the Giuoco Piano.
>>
>> By the way, the move normally considered best and most commonly played
>> after 4. Ng5 d5 is 5. ...Nh5 (avoiding the Fegatello Attack or the
>> perhaps better 6. d4), although back in my tournament-playing days, I
>> always preferred 5. ... Nd4, the Fritz Defense.
>>
>> Since you like traps, I'll mention a common trap in the Fritz
>> Variation:
>>
>> 1. e4 e5
>> 2. Nf3 Nc6
>> 3. Bc4 Nf6
>> 4. Ng5 d5
>> 5. exd5 Nd4 (the Fritz Variation)
>> 6. d6?? Qxd6 (much better play is 6. c3 b5)
>> 7. Nxf7 Qc6
>> 8. Nxh8 Qxg2
>> 9. Rh1 Qe4+
>> 10. Be2 Nf3++
>
>That's a humoristic one. I have played those, but not with the handle Carnivorum. At least I couldn't find them quickly.
> Here are some of 'm:
>
>https://lichess.org/OYQEe7Jf/black#20
>https://lichess.org/WoGCaVJB/black

That's exactly the same game I posted above. Why did you repeat it?

>https://lichess.org/1TjxvsB3/black#20

And again? You had to post he same game twice in one message?

Should I have repeated the moves I posted above a dozen times or so
because I played the same game a dozen times?

>
>I played this more often, but I don’t feel like digging them all up.
>
>>
>> I've played and won the black side of that game many times.
>>
>> And by the way, another trappy line in the Two Knights Defense is the
>> Wilkes-Barre Variation (aka Traxler Counterattack).
>>
>> 1. e4 e5
>> 2. Nf3 Nc6
>> 3. Bc4 Nf6
>> 4. Ng5 Bc5
>>
>> You might like to look into playing that.
>
>When it is played against me, I hate it. I lose often against it, so I try to avoid it.
>
>> > and he put his horse on g5, and had a double attack on f7.
>> >
>> >So my horse on f6 jumped forward

>> A very agile horse. When you keep score do your write H instead of N
>> and C instead of R?
>
>No, I write P in stead of N, and T in stead of R. That’s because I use the Dutch initials, which is my native language.

Interesting, thanks. I hadn't realized you were Dutch.

Speaking of the Dutch, I once played against Max Euwe in a
simultaneous he gave at the Manhattan Chess Club in NYC. I drew.

>P stands for “paard”, and that means horse. T stands for “toren” and that means tower.

>> > and took his pawn on e4, which was defended by his horse on g5. But he didn't take my horse, but went for bigger game,
>> > and smacked in with his horse on f7, forking my queen and castle.
>> >
>> >I saved my queen and put her on h4, threatening mate on f2, and he castled.
>> You should be consistent in using the wrong terms and say he "rooked."
>
>Sometimes I mix things up. I see that above I used “castle” and also “rook”.
>Slip of the keyboard.

You *mess* things up if you insist on not using the standard English
terms. As I said above, you come across as an ignorant beginner at
chess.

>
>> >Now the problem was, I had totally forgotten what to play now. Now black is supposed to sacrifice his horse on f2, and go on winning the game, but I had no idea, so I was on my own.
>> My opening books are very old, but the one I rely on (by Paul Keres)
>> says Black should play 6...Nf6 with advantage. Perhaps there are newer
>> better choices; I don't know.
>
>I just checked Stockfish, and he

"He"? That should be "it." Stockfish isn't a person.

> says sacrifice your horse on f2, and he sets white on minus 3.5. So that is bad for white and as good as winning for black.

OK, thanks. As I suspected, my old Keres book (I've had it for around
65 years) is out of date on that.

On Monday, February 7, 2022 at 2:13:23 AM UTC+2, Ken Blake wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Feb 2022 14:56:48 -0800 (PST), Eli Kesef
> <nastyho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Sunday, February 6, 2022 at 8:21:35 PM UTC+2, Ken Blake wrote:
> >> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 22:59:46 -0800 (PST), Eli Kesef
> >> <nastyho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Bs"d
> >> >
> >> >So in this game: https://lichess.org/tbJq9ykmfPd9 the enemy made an attempt to fry my liver.
>
> >> No, he did not. Assuming you are referring to the "Fried Liver
> >> Attack," this game has nothing to do with the Fried Liver Attack.

Bs”d

Well, it are the preliminaries to the Fried Liver.

> >Bs"d
> What does Bs"d mean?

https://tinyurl.com/Basiata-d

> >But I got your point about the Italian, but what I meant was: White played the preliminary moves for the Italian.
> I knew what you meant, but that's not an excuse for writing the wrong
> thing.

Were you a school teacher?

> >> By the way, the move normally considered best and most commonly played
> >> after 4. Ng5 d5 is 5. ...Nh5 (avoiding the Fegatello Attack or the
> >> perhaps better 6. d4), although back in my tournament-playing days, I
> >> always preferred 5. ... Nd4, the Fritz Defense.
> >>
> >> Since you like traps, I'll mention a common trap in the Fritz
> >> Variation:
> >>
> >> 1. e4 e5
> >> 2. Nf3 Nc6
> >> 3. Bc4 Nf6
> >> 4. Ng5 d5
> >> 5. exd5 Nd4 (the Fritz Variation)
> >> 6. d6?? Qxd6 (much better play is 6. c3 b5)
> >> 7. Nxf7 Qc6
> >> 8. Nxh8 Qxg2
> >> 9. Rh1 Qe4+
> >> 10. Be2 Nf3++
> >
> >That's a humoristic one. I have played those, but not with the handle Carnivorum. At least I couldn't find them quickly.
> > Here are some of 'm:
> >
> >https://lichess.org/OYQEe7Jf/black#20
> >https://lichess.org/WoGCaVJB/black
> That's exactly the same game I posted above. Why did you repeat it?
>
> >https://lichess.org/1TjxvsB3/black#20
>
>
> And again? You had to post he same game twice in one message?

It wasn’t the same game, it was a different game with the same moves.

> Should I have repeated the moves I posted above a dozen times or so
> because I played the same game a dozen times?

I didn’t post them to humor you, I posted them to prove that I already played that trap.

> >Sometimes I mix things up. I see that above I used “castle” and also “rook”.
> >Slip of the keyboard.
> You *mess* things up if you insist on not using the standard English
> terms. As I said above, you come across as an ignorant beginner at
> chess.

So if I use the correct English, than I look like a stronger chess player?

But why would I wanna pretend I’m something which I’m not?

> >I just checked Stockfish, and he
> "He"? That should be "it." Stockfish isn't a person.

I think it is disrespectful to address a supergrandmaster like Stockfish as “it”.

> > says sacrifice your horse on f2, and he sets white on minus 3.5. So that is bad for white and as good as winning for black.
> OK, thanks. As I suspected, my old Keres book (I've had it for around
> 65 years) is out of date on that.

I read somewhere that Keres was worldchampionship material, but he couldn’t find Nxf2, and Stockfish finds it in a fraction of second.
Amazing.

 https://tinyurl.com/vast-jungle

Bs"d

So when the enemy played a two horses defense, I worked up to a Fried Liver, but at the moment supreme I didn't sacrifice my horse on f7, but decided to play d4, thereby going for the Lolli attack, and then after d4 smack my horse in on f7. That is, if he doesn't play Be6.

That d4 has a nice drop of poison in it, well, at least for the horse. The pawn can take the d4 pawn, but not the horse. But the enemy's horse took my d4 pawn anyway, he must have thought he was immune for the poison, and therefore the enemy had to play a horse down: https://lichess.org/PpXj6xoEHkJG

And that proved enough for a quick win.

I gave somebody some print outs of some good traps. He started off with the Blackburn-Shilling. He already mated multiple opponents on move 7. He might be hooked for life. :D

I'm learning now a new trap against the Sicilian. I'll try to keep you all informed. Hopefully the first victims will bite the dust soon. :)

https://tinyurl.com/100-traps

Bs"d

This is an interesting variant of the Tennison gambit. As usual I started with a Reti, gambiteered a pawn, and the game was on:
lichess.org/emBu8UEASMPJ

After I sacrificed a pawn of mine, the enemy came out immediately with his queen, in order to protect his lone pawn. And for that eventuality I had just the right trap. The trap that the enemy fell into heels over head. The kind of trap that costed the enemy a full castle. He played on. A horse fork popped up, which costed the enemy more material, and then yet another horse fork popped up, but before I could execute that one the enemy surrendered..

Horse forks are fun. Almost much fun as opening traps :D

tinyurl.com/deadly-Tennison

Bs"d

In this game https://lichess.org/p6yqZYhwywDZ the enemy played very slowly and deliberately, well, at least in the beginning, and he was high in the 1800's, so I thought I would never catch him in the obvious variant of the Tennison trap, so I went with the more obscure one. And the worked. Praise the LORD!!

He blundered away a bishop after I worked him in a real bad position. He played on, but on move 15 he blundered away his queen, probably suffering from shock because of the opening, and he threw in the towel.

Tennison did it again!

https://tinyurl.com/Tennison-tank-missile

Bs"d

In this game https://lichess.org/p6yqZYhwywDZ the enemy played very slowly and deliberately, well, at least in the beginning, and he was high in the 1800's, so I thought I would never catch him in the obvious variant of the Tennison trap, so I went with the more obscure one. And it worked. Praise the LORD!!

He blundered away a bishop after I worked him in a real bad position. He played on, but on move 15 he blundered away his queen, probably suffering from shock because of the opening, and he threw in the towel.

Tennison did it again!

https://tinyurl.com/Tennison-tank-missile

On Wednesday, February 23, 2022 at 10:10:00 AM UTC-5, Eli Kesef wrote:
> Bs"d
>
> So in this game https://lichess.org/Zcjfj1iHu39C the enemy managed to avoid the Tennison trap, only to fall headlong into the fishing pole trap.
> He tried to squirm out of it, but on move 18 the lone black king was mated on e3, while the whole black army was still stuck in the back.
>
> That's what you get when you refuse to study traps.

Your opponents would do much better if someone forbid them from pushing their h pawns until the ending.

William Hyde

On Friday, February 25, 2022 at 1:01:48 AM UTC+2, William Hyde wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 23, 2022 at 10:10:00 AM UTC-5, Eli Kesef wrote:
> > Bs"d
> >
> > So in this game https://lichess.org/Zcjfj1iHu39C the enemy managed to avoid the Tennison trap, only to fall headlong into the fishing pole trap.
> > He tried to squirm out of it, but on move 18 the lone black king was mated on e3, while the whole black army was still stuck in the back.
> >
> > That's what you get when you refuse to study traps.
> Your opponents would do much better if someone forbid them from pushing their h pawns until the ending.

Bs"d

One of my books says: "Don't push your A and H pawns!", but I noticed I usually fare better if I do.

https://tinyurl.com/chess-plan

On Friday, February 25, 2022 at 2:15:10 AM UTC-5, Eli Kesef wrote:
> On Friday, February 25, 2022 at 1:01:48 AM UTC+2, William Hyde wrote:
> > On Wednesday, February 23, 2022 at 10:10:00 AM UTC-5, Eli Kesef wrote:
> > > Bs"d
> > >
> > > So in this game https://lichess.org/Zcjfj1iHu39C the enemy managed to avoid the Tennison trap, only to fall headlong into the fishing pole trap.
> > > He tried to squirm out of it, but on move 18 the lone black king was mated on e3, while the whole black army was still stuck in the back.
> > >
> > > That's what you get when you refuse to study traps.
> > Your opponents would do much better if someone forbid them from pushing their h pawns until the ending.
> Bs"d
>
> One of my books says: "Don't push your A and H pawns!", but I noticed I usually fare better if I do.

There are times when it is right to use these pawns. But your opponents do so at the wrong times to such an extent that it would be better to forgo the advantage of doing this when it is right, so as to avoid the times when it is suicidal. The shortest speed game I lost as a kid involved, guess what, an inauspicious h3.

In the games I've seen, pretty much every move of your a-pawn is a mistake. You h-pawn moves mostly are part of the standard piece sac on g4/g5 and help you win very quickly. But only because (a) the opponents can't seem to help grabbing the piece. If they restrain themselves the value of h5/4 is unclear, and (b) they have needlessly played h3/6 themselves in the first place.

In real chess the h4/5 move is on occasion played, but the piece not taken. The other player is content to have provoked a king-side weakness. And while the piece cannot be take immediately, it will eventually be safe to do so, so it must be moved or exchanged with probable loss of time. But from what I have seen you need not fear that. "A free piece!" they think - and that's all they think.

William Hyde

On Sunday, February 27, 2022 at 11:39:37 PM UTC+2, William Hyde wrote:
> On Friday, February 25, 2022 at 2:15:10 AM UTC-5, Eli Kesef wrote:
> > On Friday, February 25, 2022 at 1:01:48 AM UTC+2, William Hyde wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, February 23, 2022 at 10:10:00 AM UTC-5, Eli Kesef wrote:
> > > > Bs"d
> > > >
> > > > So in this game https://lichess.org/Zcjfj1iHu39C the enemy managed to avoid the Tennison trap, only to fall headlong into the fishing pole trap.
> > > > He tried to squirm out of it, but on move 18 the lone black king was mated on e3, while the whole black army was still stuck in the back.
> > > >
> > > > That's what you get when you refuse to study traps.
> > > Your opponents would do much better if someone forbid them from pushing their h pawns until the ending.
> > Bs"d
> >
> > One of my books says: "Don't push your A and H pawns!", but I noticed I usually fare better if I do.
> There are times when it is right to use these pawns. But your opponents do so at the wrong times to such an extent that it would be better to forgo the advantage of doing this when it is right, so as to avoid the times when it is suicidal. The shortest speed game I lost as a kid involved, guess what, an inauspicious h3.
>
>
> In the games I've seen, pretty much every move of your a-pawn is a mistake. You h-pawn moves mostly are part of the standard piece sac on g4/g5 and help you win very quickly.

Bs"d

That would be the fishing pole trap. But most of the time they don't take the bait. But it is funny, playing something like that.

> But only because (a) the opponents can't seem to help grabbing the piece. If they restrain themselves the value of h5/4 is unclear, and (b) they have needlessly played h3/6 themselves in the first place.
>
> In real chess the h4/5 move is on occasion played, but the piece not taken. The other player is content to have provoked a king-side weakness. And while the piece cannot be take immediately, it will eventually be safe to do so, so it must be moved or exchanged with probable loss of time. But from what I have seen you need not fear that. "A free piece!" they think - and that's all they think.

Sometimes they do take the bait, and the win is then quick and spectacular :D

And that makes it all worth wile.

https://tinyurl.com/fish-pole-trap

Bs"d

Here is a nice example of a fishing pole trap: https://lichess.org/xKu7eq9cxYUQ

De enemy was rated 1891, so he was familiar with the fishing pole trap, and after he took my bishop, and I took the pawn that took my bishop, and attacked his horse, he didn't remove his horse, because that would have led to a quick mate.
Instead he took a horse of mine with his bishop, and I could take his bishop, but I decided it would be more interesting to try to continue the trap. So I took his horse, and he played g3. He had no choice in that one, because he had to stop my queen from coming to h5, because then it would be all over for him. Well, at least it looked that way. Stockfish showed me he had another line which would lead to a draw, or a pawn advantage for black, but I would not have seen that, and neither did the enemy. So pawn g6 it was. At this point I could take his bishop, and end up with a pawn to the good, by I decided to throw caution to the wind, and continue the fishing pole attack, and I planted my queen on f3, so I could line her up with my castle on the h line, and make the fatal threat. I expected him then to take my pawn on f6, so that when I played Qh3, he would put his bishop on h4, to save his king from being mated. I could then still win his bishop, but the mate would be out the window.
And that was were he went wrong.
In stead of playing the saving move Bxf6, he played Qxd4, and that was the beginning of the end.
I lined my queen up with my castle by playing Qh3, and there was no more stopping the mate. Well, actually he could stop the mate, but that would involve him sacrificing his queen for nothing on d2, but he didn't see that, so he sacrificed his queen on f2.
An act of desperation.
My king took his queen, after which he checked me with his bishop, another act of desperation. But before I could move he saw the futility of it all, and he committed the final act of desperation, and he pushed the resign button, and it was all over.

The fishing pole trap did it again.

http://tiny.cc/dep-pos

On Wednesday, March 2, 2022 at 12:54:18 PM UTC-5, Eli Kesef wrote:
> Bs"d
>
> Here is a nice example of a fishing pole trap: https://lichess.org/xKu7eq9cxYUQ
>
> De enemy was rated 1891,

Meaningless on lichess.

so he was familiar with the fishing pole trap,

The game shows clearly that he was not.

Your h4 move was very bad, but he fell for it.

and after he took my bishop, and I took the pawn that took my bishop, and attacked his horse, he didn't remove his horse, because that would have led to a quick mate.
> Instead he took a horse of mine with his bishop, and I could take his bishop, but I decided it would be more interesting to try to continue the trap.. So I took his horse, and he played g3. He had no choice in that one, because he had to stop my queen from coming to h5, because then it would be all over for him. Well, at least it looked that way. Stockfish showed me he had another line which would lead to a draw, or a pawn advantage for black, but I would not have seen that, and neither did the enemy. So pawn g6 it was.. At this point I could take his bishop, and end up with a pawn to the good,

I don't think so. Your e-pawn will soon fall, and probably your f pawn also. So you have to carry on attacking.

by I decided to throw caution to the wind, and continue the fishing pole attack, and I planted my queen on f3, so I could line her up with my castle on the h line, and make the fatal threat. I expected him then to take my pawn on f6, so that when I played Qh3, he would put his bishop on h4, to save his king from being mated.

Better to take on f6 with the queen, giving the bishop back a different way.. He gets two pawns and has an easy win. With his queen having access to g7 there is no mate.

I could then still win his bishop, but the mate would be out the window.
> And that was were he went wrong.
> In stead of playing the saving move Bxf6, he played Qxd4, and that was the beginning of the end.
> I lined my queen up with my castle by playing Qh3, and there was no more stopping the mate.

An old article proposed the following definition:

Patzer - a player who does not know the meaning of "resigns".

William Hyde

On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 12:31:19 AM UTC+2, William Hyde wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 2, 2022 at 12:54:18 PM UTC-5, Eli Kesef wrote:
> > Bs"d
> >
> > Here is a nice example of a fishing pole trap: https://lichess.org/xKu7eq9cxYUQ
> >
> > De enemy was rated 1891,
> Meaningless on lichess.
> so he was familiar with the fishing pole trap,
> The game shows clearly that he was not.
>
> Your h4 move was very bad, but he fell for it.
> and after he took my bishop, and I took the pawn that took my bishop, and attacked his horse, he didn't remove his horse, because that would have led to a quick mate.
> > Instead he took a horse of mine with his bishop, and I could take his bishop, but I decided it would be more interesting to try to continue the trap. So I took his horse, and he played g3. He had no choice in that one, because he had to stop my queen from coming to h5, because then it would be all over for him. Well, at least it looked that way. Stockfish showed me he had another line which would lead to a draw, or a pawn advantage for black, but I would not have seen that, and neither did the enemy. So pawn g6 it was. At this point I could take his bishop, and end up with a pawn to the good,
> I don't think so. Your e-pawn will soon fall, and probably your f pawn also. So you have to carry on attacking.
> by I decided to throw caution to the wind, and continue the fishing pole attack, and I planted my queen on f3, so I could line her up with my castle on the h line, and make the fatal threat. I expected him then to take my pawn on f6, so that when I played Qh3, he would put his bishop on h4, to save his king from being mated.
> Better to take on f6 with the queen, giving the bishop back a different way. He gets two pawns and has an easy win. With his queen having access to g7 there is no mate.

Bs"d

Interesting, I hadn't seen that one. It is weird, the moment he does g3, Stockfish says I'm 6.1 points ahead. But, after I play my queen to f4, he right away puts me on -4.7, that must be a really horrible move I played, going down more than 10 points in one move. And I think it looks just fine. Weird.
Stockfish says that black must take my pawn on f6 with his bishop, and when I let the black queen take that pawn, Stockfish says that white then in that one move goes from -4.7 to +2.6. So there is something wrong with the queen taking that pawn.

I think Stockfish is just too good. I can't understand why he does what he does. I have the same problem when I look at GM games, I have no idea what's flying. That old saying comes to mind: "Have you ever seen a monkey examining a watch?"
It is just out of my league.

I just stick to my humble games, and don't try to understand what Stockfish is telling me, it only confuses me.

http://tinyurl.com/50-proc-math

On Wednesday, March 2, 2022 at 6:07:11 PM UTC-5, Eli Kesef wrote:
> On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 12:31:19 AM UTC+2, William Hyde wrote:
> > On Wednesday, March 2, 2022 at 12:54:18 PM UTC-5, Eli Kesef wrote:
> > > Bs"d
> > >
> > > Here is a nice example of a fishing pole trap: https://lichess.org/xKu7eq9cxYUQ
> > >
> > > De enemy was rated 1891,
> > Meaningless on lichess.
> > so he was familiar with the fishing pole trap,
> > The game shows clearly that he was not.
> >
> > Your h4 move was very bad, but he fell for it.
> > and after he took my bishop, and I took the pawn that took my bishop, and attacked his horse, he didn't remove his horse, because that would have led to a quick mate.
> > > Instead he took a horse of mine with his bishop, and I could take his bishop, but I decided it would be more interesting to try to continue the trap. So I took his horse, and he played g3. He had no choice in that one, because he had to stop my queen from coming to h5, because then it would be all over for him. Well, at least it looked that way. Stockfish showed me he had another line which would lead to a draw, or a pawn advantage for black, but I would not have seen that, and neither did the enemy. So pawn g6 it was. At this point I could take his bishop, and end up with a pawn to the good,
> > I don't think so. Your e-pawn will soon fall, and probably your f pawn also. So you have to carry on attacking.
> > by I decided to throw caution to the wind, and continue the fishing pole attack, and I planted my queen on f3, so I could line her up with my castle on the h line, and make the fatal threat. I expected him then to take my pawn on f6, so that when I played Qh3, he would put his bishop on h4, to save his king from being mated.
> > Better to take on f6 with the queen, giving the bishop back a different way. He gets two pawns and has an easy win. With his queen having access to g7 there is no mate.
> Bs"d
>
> Interesting, I hadn't seen that one. It is weird, the moment he does g3, Stockfish says I'm 6.1 points ahead. But, after I play my queen to f4, he right away puts me on -4.7, that must be a really horrible move I played, going down more than 10 points in one move. And I think it looks just fine. Weird.

The soviets used to call positions where tactics predominate "irrational". By which they meant that normal considerations didn't apply. Qg4 looks fine to you, as it activates your queen and has a threat. But in an "irrational" position only tactics matter, and stockfish says your move is tactically wrong.

After your Qg4 I thought my line won, but it's not -4.7, so there must be a better move than Qxf6. Given the size of the advantage, it seems that black must be able to both prevent mate and keep the extra piece. Black can do this with 13 ... Bxf6 14 Qh3 Re8. Embarrassing that I missed it. I failed to follow Lasker's law "When you see a good move don't play it, look for a better one" and was satisfied with 13 ... Qxf6. Which stockfish says isn't so good after all but I don't see the refutation. It never pays to ignore Lasker.

And of course there must be a better move than Qg4. As you are a piece down this must involve an attack on the king but I don't see anything immediate. Perhaps the counter intuitive line of taking the bishop and allowing a queen exchange works. If you can hold your f-pawn and double rooks on the h-file ... black is rather tied up but I suspect he can prevent that. Perhaps you should ask stockfish what it recommeds for white at move 13.

(you really have to pay more attention to your notation if you want other people to understand you - he played g6 not g3 and you've described your queen move as to f3 and f4, never the g4 you moved it to)

> Stockfish says that black must take my pawn on f6 with his bishop, and when I let the black queen take that pawn, Stockfish says that white then in that one move goes from -4.7 to +2.6. So there is something wrong with the queen taking that pawn.

This also I cannot see. Getting weak in my old age!

> I think Stockfish is just too good. I can't understand why he does what he does.

You have to ask it more questions. What does is recommend on move 13 for while, and how does white refute 13 Qxf6? That will tell you something about the position. And other positions as well.

>I have the same problem when I look at GM games, I have no idea what's flying. That old saying comes to mind: "Have you ever seen a monkey examining a watch?"

It's not an old saying, just an insult by Steinitz. There's a reason why Steinitz moved as much as he did.

I never found looking at unannotated games, by GMs or anyone else, to be of much use. At best you learn some opening lines.

William Hyde

On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 10:47:40 PM UTC+2, William Hyde wrote:

> > > Better to take on f6 with the queen, giving the bishop back a different way. He gets two pawns and has an easy win. With his queen having access to g7 there is no mate.
> > Bs"d
> >
> > Interesting, I hadn't seen that one. It is weird, the moment he does g3, Stockfish says I'm 6.1 points ahead. But, after I play my queen to f4, he right away puts me on -4.7, that must be a really horrible move I played, going down more than 10 points in one move. And I think it looks just fine. Weird.
> The soviets used to call positions where tactics predominate "irrational".. By which they meant that normal considerations didn't apply. Qg4 looks fine to you, as it activates your queen and has a threat. But in an "irrational" position only tactics matter, and stockfish says your move is tactically wrong.
>
> After your Qg4 I thought my line won, but it's not -4.7, so there must be a better move than Qxf6. Given the size of the advantage, it seems that black must be able to both prevent mate and keep the extra piece. Black can do this with 13 ... Bxf6 14 Qh3 Re8. Embarrassing that I missed it. I failed to follow Lasker's law "When you see a good move don't play it, look for a better one" and was satisfied with 13 ... Qxf6. Which stockfish says isn't so good after all but I don't see the refutation. It never pays to ignore Lasker.
>
> And of course there must be a better move than Qg4. As you are a piece down this must involve an attack on the king but I don't see anything immediate. Perhaps the counter intuitive line of taking the bishop and allowing a queen exchange works. If you can hold your f-pawn and double rooks on the h-file ... black is rather tied up but I suspect he can prevent that. Perhaps you should ask stockfish what it recommeds for white at move 13.

Bs"d

After 13. Qg4 Stockfish says that black must do Bxf6, and white is then -5.1.
When I then line up my queen with my castle by 14. h3, then Stockfish does Re8, and sudden white has nothing anymore. I can then give one check on h7 with the queen, and that was that. Gave away a piece for nothing.

Stockfish says that white must play on move 13 dxe5. Then comes 13. … Nxe5 14. Ne4 – Qxd1 15. Rxd1 – b7, and materially it is totally equal, and I think I like black’s set up better, but Stockfish give white a 7.1 points advantage.
When I let Stockfish continue against himself he goes like this: 16. Be2 – a6 17. Rh4 – Bb7 18. Ng5 – Rad8 19. Rh7 – Rxd1 20. Kxd1 – Bxg2 21. Rg7+ Kh8 22. Rh7+ Kg8 23. Rg7+ Kh8 24. f4 – Nd7 25. Nxf7+ Rxf7 26. Rxf7

That gives white castle advantage, but nobody can see that in advance. Except for Stockfish of course.

The moral of the story is that I was totally lost after my fishing pole sacrifice, but the enemy messed up, and I won the game.

> (you really have to pay more attention to your notation if you want other people to understand you - he played g6 not g3 and you've described your queen move as to f3 and f4, never the g4 you moved it to)

Yeah, you’re right. I just gave it out of the top of my head, without looking at the board, and then I make a lot of mistakes. But I didn’t really expect anyone to take my games seriously, let alone to play them over and analyze them.
But I think the notation should be good now, or at least a lot better.

> > Stockfish says that black must take my pawn on f6 with his bishop, and when I let the black queen take that pawn, Stockfish says that white then in that one move goes from -4.7 to +2.6. So there is something wrong with the queen taking that pawn.
> This also I cannot see. Getting weak in my old age!

Well, I doubt if Carlsen would see this 10 moves ahead, that after 10 moves white loses a castle.

> > I think Stockfish is just too good. I can't understand why he does what he does.
> You have to ask it more questions. What does is recommend on move 13 for while, and how does white refute 13 Qxf6? That will tell you something about the position. And other positions as well.

Qf6 is refuted in the same way as Qg4. White is then lost, because lining up the queen with the castle is just useless after black’s Re8.

> >I have the same problem when I look at GM games, I have no idea what's flying. That old saying comes to mind: "Have you ever seen a monkey examining a watch?"
> It's not an old saying, just an insult by Steinitz. There's a reason why Steinitz moved as much as he did.
>
> I never found looking at unannotated games, by GMs or anyone else, to be of much use. At best you learn some opening lines.

That’s why I prefer traps, at least with those I regularly have spectacular success.

  https://tinyurl.com/Q-trap-thank-U  

On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 10:47:40 PM UTC+2, William Hyde wrote:

> > > Better to take on f6 with the queen, giving the bishop back a different way. He gets two pawns and has an easy win. With his queen having access to g7 there is no mate.
> > Bs"d
> >
> > Interesting, I hadn't seen that one. It is weird, the moment he does g3, Stockfish says I'm 6.1 points ahead. But, after I play my queen to f4, he right away puts me on -4.7, that must be a really horrible move I played, going down more than 10 points in one move. And I think it looks just fine. Weird.
> The soviets used to call positions where tactics predominate "irrational".. By which they meant that normal considerations didn't apply. Qg4 looks fine to you, as it activates your queen and has a threat. But in an "irrational" position only tactics matter, and stockfish says your move is tactically wrong.
>
> After your Qg4 I thought my line won, but it's not -4.7, so there must be a better move than Qxf6. Given the size of the advantage, it seems that black must be able to both prevent mate and keep the extra piece. Black can do this with 13 ... Bxf6 14 Qh3 Re8. Embarrassing that I missed it. I failed to follow Lasker's law "When you see a good move don't play it, look for a better one" and was satisfied with 13 ... Qxf6. Which stockfish says isn't so good after all but I don't see the refutation. It never pays to ignore Lasker.
>
> And of course there must be a better move than Qg4. As you are a piece down this must involve an attack on the king but I don't see anything immediate. Perhaps the counter intuitive line of taking the bishop and allowing a queen exchange works. If you can hold your f-pawn and double rooks on the h-file ... black is rather tied up but I suspect he can prevent that. Perhaps you should ask stockfish what it recommeds for white at move 13.

Bs"d

After 13. Qg4 Stockfish says that black must do Bxf6, and white is then -5.1.
When I then line up my queen with my castle by 14. h3, then Stockfish does Re8, and sudden white has nothing anymore. I can then give one check on h7 with the queen, and that was that. Gave away a piece for nothing.

Stockfish says that white must play on move 13 dxe5. Then comes 13. … Nxe5 14. Ne4 – Qxd1 15. Rxd1 – b7, and materially it is totally equal, and I think I like black’s set up better, but Stockfish give white a 7.1 points advantage.
When I let Stockfish continue against himself he goes like this: 16. Be2 – a6 17. Rh4 – Bb7 18. Ng5 – Rad8 19. Rh7 – Rxd1 20. Kxd1 – Bxg2 21. Rg7+ Kh8 22. Rh7+ Kg8 23. Rg7+ Kh8 24. f4 – Nd7 25. Nxf7+ Rxf7 26. Rxf7

That gives white castle advantage, but nobody can see that in advance. Except for Stockfish of course.

The moral of the story is that I was totally lost after my fishing pole sacrifice, but the enemy messed up, and I won the game.

> (you really have to pay more attention to your notation if you want other people to understand you - he played g6 not g3 and you've described your queen move as to f3 and f4, never the g4 you moved it to)

Yeah, you’re right. I just gave it out of the top of my head, without looking at the board, and then I make a lot of mistakes. But I didn’t really expect anyone to take my games seriously, let alone to play them over and analyze them.
But I think the notation should be good now, or at least a lot better.

> > Stockfish says that black must take my pawn on f6 with his bishop, and when I let the black queen take that pawn, Stockfish says that white then in that one move goes from -4.7 to +2.6. So there is something wrong with the queen taking that pawn.
> This also I cannot see. Getting weak in my old age!

Well, I doubt if Carlsen would see this 10 moves ahead, that after 10 moves white loses a castle.

> > I think Stockfish is just too good. I can't understand why he does what he does.
> You have to ask it more questions. What does is recommend on move 13 for while, and how does white refute 13 Qxf6? That will tell you something about the position. And other positions as well.

Qf3 is refuted in the same way as Qg4. White is then lost, because lining up the queen with the castle is just useless after black’s Re8.

> >I have the same problem when I look at GM games, I have no idea what's flying. That old saying comes to mind: "Have you ever seen a monkey examining a watch?"
> It's not an old saying, just an insult by Steinitz. There's a reason why Steinitz moved as much as he did.
>
> I never found looking at unannotated games, by GMs or anyone else, to be of much use. At best you learn some opening lines.

That’s why I prefer traps, at least with those I regularly have spectacular success.

https://tinyurl.com/Q-trap-thank-U

On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 10:47:40 PM UTC+2, William Hyde wrote:

> You have to ask it more questions. What does is recommend on move 13 for while, and how does white refute 13 Qxf6? That will tell you something about the position. And other positions as well.

Bs"d

When I look here in analysis board of Lichess: https://lichess.org/xKu7eq9c/white#24 and I switch on Stockfish, and I let black do 13. Qxf6, then he gives an enormous long line, in which white doesn't get any material advantage, yet he keeps on insisting white is almost a piece up.

I have no idea why he says that, and I don't get anything out of it.

https://tinyurl.com/no-idle-amuse

Bs"d

So I started with the Zukertort, but the enemy, rated 1900 on Lichess, (minus one) didn't cooperate, and I could not turn it into a Tennison gambit: https://lichess.org/boMmZoYe6rK4
So I turned it into the Italian, and then hoped for a Koltanowsky gambit. You know; that opening that has 21 traps in it.
I've been brushing up on it over the weekend, so I thought: "Let's give it a try."

At this point the enemy was willing to cooperate, and on move 5 I played d4, and the Koltanowsky gambit was in full swing. I sacrificed my d pawn. The enemy had now four options: Take my d pawn with his pawn, take it with his horse, take it with his bishop, or not take it at all. The good news is: Three of those four option are wrong, and one is OK. And if he plays the good option, then there are in that line still a handful of traps.

But fortunately, he took one of the wrong options, he took my offending pawn with his horse.
Punishment comes after the sin, and he had to part with a piece in the opening. He thought he could at least take a pawn from me, but he overlooked a small but painful pawn fork, and was therefore about to lose yet another piece, and therefore he surrendered on move 16.

Life is good when the enemies step into your opening traps.

HalleluJah!!

https://tinyurl.com/old-man-chess

Bs"d

This opponent fell victim to the Stafford gambit: https://lichess.org/pj0ayC0RUPPl

I gave him a pawn, took one back, and got an exchange as interest.

Babes in the woods....

https://tinyurl.com/Deadly-Staff

Bs"d

I started with the Zukertort, hoping for a Tennison gambit. The enemy didn't cooperate, so I went for the Italian, followed by the Koltanowsky gambit.. After I sacrificed my d4 pawn the enemy didn't dare to take it, a mistake that proved to fatal for one of his horses. He had to part with a horse in the opening, and the rest was a mopping up operation: https://groups.google.com/g/rec.games.chess.misc/c/hKPCQE8g-oc

Koltanowsky did it again!

https://tinyurl.com/gloeiogen

Bs"d

I started with the Zukertort, hoping for a Tennison gambit. The enemy didn't cooperate, so I went for the Italian, followed by the Koltanowsky gambit. After I sacrificed my d4 pawn the enemy didn't dare to take it, a mistake that proved to fatal for one of his horses. He had to part with a horse in the opening, and the rest was a mopping up operation:
https://lichess.org/uSzymv1OxF3P

Koltanowsky did it again!

https://tinyurl.com/gloeiogen

On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 5:42:46 PM UTC-4, Eli Kesef wrote:
> Bs"d
>
> So I started with the Zukertort, but the enemy, rated 1900 on Lichess, (minus one)

What confuses me is how you can be rated only slightly higher than this guy, who is terrible. You must be losing a lot of games. Are there people out there who actually know the gambits you are springing on them?

William Hyde

On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 11:12:35 PM UTC+2, William Hyde wrote:
> On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 5:42:46 PM UTC-4, Eli Kesef wrote:
> > Bs"d
> >
> > So I started with the Zukertort, but the enemy, rated 1900 on Lichess, (minus one)
> What confuses me is how you can be rated only slightly higher than this guy, who is terrible.

Bs"d

That is because I'm also terrible.

> You must be losing a lot of games. Are there people out there who actually know the gambits you are springing on them?

My gambits work only in a minority of cases. They look impressive, but all the times they don't work I'm not gonna post here, so you see only the good looking tip of the iceberg.

Nowadays all those traps are out in the open on youtube. One of my traps, as explained by a GM on youtube, has 2 million hits, so about everybody knows it.

Fortunately there are still plenty left who fall for the traps, and make me happy. That's what you are doing it for.

But I don't think that that 1900 guy played terrible. The first piece he lost because of a trap, and the nature of a trap is that it is hard to see.
Then he blundered with pawn fork, but one blunder doesn't make somebody a terrible player.

I think 1900 Lichess are about average club players. About 1700 FIDE, about 1800 USCF. Not too bad, not too good, just club players.

https://tinyurl.com/mouse-trap