| |
Main
Date: 20 Dec 2005 05:55:24
From: Major Cat
Subject: Is this person _really new_ to chess?
|
I would like to kindly ask one or more
_really_ experienced players to comment
on the following:
The other day, I came across a young
person in my favorite cafe who wanted
to play some chess. He was a new face
there. He told me that he learned the
legal moves of the game three months
ago and, since then, he has been play-
ing about 3-4 games per week against
his university classmates. He also told
me that he knew next to nothing about
opening theory. Moreover, he liked
playing black...
I suggested that we play a game of
Chess_18 so that whatever opening
theory knowledge I possess (not much)
would not disadvantage him. Moreover,
I let him play black...
Amazingly enough (to me), I almost lost
the game! 8 >)
Does this person strike you as new
to chess?
Here is the game (he kept a scoresheet
which I copied after our game):
[Event "CHESS_18"]
[Site "Cafe Montreal"]
[FEN "rnbbknqr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBBKNQR w - - 0 1"]
[White "Major Cat"]
[Black "Newcomer"]
[Date "2005.12.19"]
[Round "1"]
[PlyCount "83"]
[Result "1-0"]
1. e4 e5 2. Ne3 d6 3. c3 Ne6 4. Bc2 Bg5 5. f3 Bd7 6. a4 a5 7. Na3 Nc6
8. d3 h6 9. Nb5 Ne7 10. Nd5 Nxd5 11. exd5 Bxb5 12. axb5 Bxc1 13. Rxc1
Nf4
14. b6 f5 15. c4 Qf7 16. g3 Ng6 17. Ba4+ Kf8 18. Qf2 h5 19. O-O h4
20. bxc7 Qxc7 21. d4 hxg3 22. hxg3 f4 23. Qc2 Qf7 24. g4 exd4 25. Rce1
Ne5
26. Kg2 d3 27. Qc3 Qf6 28. Rh1 Rh4 29. Rxe5 dxe5 30. Qxd3 Rxh1 31. Kxh1
Qh4+
32. Kg2 Kg8 33. Bc2 b5 34. c5 Rc8 35. c6 Kh8 36. Qe4 a4 37. d6 a3
38. bxa3 Qg3+ 39. Kf1 Qh3+ 40. Ke1 b4 41. axb4 Ra8 42. Qh7+ 1-0
Regards,
Major Cat
|
|
| |
Date: 20 Dec 2005 18:57:47
From: Ron
Subject: Re: Is this person _really new_ to chess?
|
In article <[email protected] >, Major Cat <[email protected]>
wrote:
> I suggested that we play a game of
> Chess_18 so that whatever opening
> theory knowledge I possess (not much)
> would not disadvantage him. Moreover,
> I let him play black...
This probably isn't helping you standard chess in the long run. And it's
not as much of an advantage as you might think.
|
| | |
Date: 20 Dec 2005 21:20:24
From: Major Cat
Subject: Re: Is this person _really new_ to chess?
|
Ron wrote:
>
> In article <[email protected]>, Major Cat <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > I suggested that we play a game of
> > Chess_18 so that whatever opening
> > theory knowledge I possess (not much)
> > would not disadvantage him. Moreover,
> > I let him play black...
>
> This probably isn't helping you standard chess in the long run.
Are you talking about me or about the
young newcomer? This was a _cafe_ game,
not a chess club game full of worries
about ratings and governed by "orthodoxy".
> And it's
> not as much of an advantage as you might think.
Are you talking about the lack of opening
theory or about the fact that the newcomer
preferred to play black? The newcomer was
open-minded enough to want to try something
less "orthodox" in a relaxed setting. Well,
what is wrong with that? Moreover, what harm
is there in having let him have the black
pieces? He _preferred_ that!
Regards,
Major Cat
|
| | | |
Date: 21 Dec 2005 04:18:55
From: Ron
Subject: Re: Is this person _really new_ to chess?
|
In article <[email protected] >, Major Cat <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Are you talking about the lack of opening
> theory or about the fact that the newcomer
> preferred to play black? The newcomer was
> open-minded enough to want to try something
> less "orthodox" in a relaxed setting. Well,
> what is wrong with that? Moreover, what harm
> is there in having let him have the black
> pieces? He _preferred_ that!
Sure. My point is merely that, because pattern recognition is such an
important part of chess, randomizing the opening (and thus reducing the
frequency of recurring patterns) is going to have some negative
consequences for his development.
And his lack of "opening theory" isn't really going to be much of an
issue given that it really takes two to have a theoretical discussion.
-Ron
|
| | | | |
Date: 21 Dec 2005 01:59:23
From: Major Cat
Subject: Re: Is this person _really new_ to chess?
|
Ron wrote:
>
> In article <[email protected]>, Major Cat <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Are you talking about the lack of opening
> > theory or about the fact that the newcomer
> > preferred to play black? The newcomer was
> > open-minded enough to want to try something
> > less "orthodox" in a relaxed setting. Well,
> > what is wrong with that? Moreover, what harm
> > is there in having let him have the black
> > pieces? He _preferred_ that!
>
> Sure. My point is merely that, because pattern recognition is such an
> important part of chess, randomizing the opening (and thus reducing the
> frequency of recurring patterns) is going to have some negative
> consequences for his development.
Absolutely, the assumption being, of course,
that the newcomer would be taking every opportunity
to improve his playing of "orthodox" chess and
decline any other opportunity that may prove to
be detrimental to the aforementioned goal. Having
said that, I am of the opinion that informal cafe
chess games may not be appropriate vehicles for
enforcing unswerving adherence to serious and
monolithic "chessic" goals. Certainly, I would not
want to exhibit in any way behavior that could be
viewed as militant, narrow-minded, or both! 8 >)
>
> And his lack of "opening theory" isn't really going to be much of an
> issue given that it really takes two to have a theoretical discussion.
"Theoretical discussion"? That was an informal,
fun game in a cafe... Besides, _he_ felt that
his presumed lack of opening theory knowledge
could be a problem. I considered this to be a
non-problem and, hence, accommodated him by try-
ing something, well, "unorthodox".
I am curious, though; is "orthodoxy" the obstacle
here? Afterall, the intended focus of the thread
was about something completely different! 8 >)
>
> -Ron
Regards,
Major Cat
|
| | | | | |
Date: 21 Dec 2005 07:40:07
From: Ron
Subject: Re: Is this person _really new_ to chess?
|
In article <[email protected] >, Major Cat <[email protected]>
wrote:
> I am curious, though; is "orthodoxy" the obstacle
> here? Afterall, the intended focus of the thread
> was about something completely different! 8>)
Fair enough. But because the position is so unfamiliar, it's hard for me
to make a quick answer to your question. Or, at least, I'd have to work
a lot harder to answer it than I am interested in the answer to the
question.
-Ron
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 21 Dec 2005 03:04:29
From: Major Cat
Subject: Re: Is this person _really new_ to chess?
|
Ron wrote:
>
> In article <[email protected]>, Major Cat <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > I am curious, though; is "orthodoxy" the obstacle
> > here? Afterall, the intended focus of the thread
> > was about something completely different! 8>)
>
> Fair enough. But because the position is so unfamiliar, it's hard for me
> to make a quick answer to your question. Or, at least, I'd have to work
> a lot harder to answer it than I am interested in the answer to the
> question.
Thank you all the same.
>
> -Ron
Major Cat
|
| |
Date: 20 Dec 2005 03:20:11
From: David Ames
Subject: Re: Is this person _really new_ to chess?
|
Major Cat wrote:
>
> [Event "CHESS_18"]
> [Site "Cafe Montreal"]
> [FEN "rnbbknqr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBBKNQR w - - 0 1"]
> [White "Major Cat"]
> [Black "Newcomer"]
> [Date "2005.12.19"]
> [Round "1"]
> [PlyCount "83"]
> [Result "1-0"]
>
> 1. e4 e5 2. Ne3 d6 3. c3 Ne6 4. Bc2 Bg5
... and you say all these illegal moves are possible in some variant
you call chess_18. Hm. Never heard of it.
David Ames
|
| | |
Date: 20 Dec 2005 07:01:58
From: Major Cat
Subject: Re: Is this person _really new_ to chess?
|
David Ames wrote:
>
> Major Cat wrote:
> >
> > [Event "CHESS_18"]
> > [Site "Cafe Montreal"]
> > [FEN "rnbbknqr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBBKNQR w - - 0 1"]
> > [White "Major Cat"]
> > [Black "Newcomer"]
> > [Date "2005.12.19"]
> > [Round "1"]
> > [PlyCount "83"]
> > [Result "1-0"]
> >
> > 1. e4 e5 2. Ne3 d6 3. c3 Ne6 4. Bc2 Bg5
>
> ... and you say all these illegal moves are possible in some variant
> you call chess_18. Hm. Never heard of it.
Chess_18 is a "conservative" subset of Chess960
which preserves the King and Rooks in their ortho-
dox positions at the start of the game. FIDE
castling rules apply without variation.
The technical PGN specification for a game that
starts from a position other than the orthodox
one entails the following:
Alternative starting positions
There are two tags defined for assistance with
describing games that did not start from the
usual initial array.
Tag: SetUp
This tag takes an integer that denotes the
"set-up" status of the game. A value of "0"
indicates that the game has started from the
usual initial array. A value of "1" indicates
that the game started from a set-up position;
this position is given in the "FEN" tag pair.
This tag must appear for a game starting with
a set-up position. If it appears with a tag value
of "1", a FEN tag pair must also appear.
Tag: FEN
This tag uses a string that gives the Forsyth-
Edwards Notation for the starting position used
in the game. If a SetUp tag appears with a tag
value of "1", the FEN tag pair is also required.
My computer program does not require the SetUp
tag, only the FEN tag.
>
> David Ames
Regards,
Major Cat
|
| | |
Date: 20 Dec 2005 11:45:58
From: Anders Thulin
Subject: Re: Is this person _really new_ to chess?
|
David Ames wrote:
> ... and you say all these illegal moves are possible in some variant
> you call chess_18.
Add [Setup 1] ...
--
Anders Thulin ath*algonet.se http://www.algonet.se/~ath
|
|
