Why not a pawn fork

Date: 21 Feb 2008 17:11:53
From: Terry
Subject: Why not a pawn fork

It looks like a pawn fork for black would have given him the
advantage.

I am sure I am missing something.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4013737198399816667&q=chess+queen+gambit&total=85&start=0&num=100&so=0&type=search&plindex=2

Date: 21 Feb 2008 17:47:28
From: Offramp
Subject: Re: Why not a pawn fork

Date: 23 Feb 2008 07:32:17
From: Offramp
Subject: Re: Why not a pawn fork

On Feb 23, 10:39 am, help bot <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Feb 23, 4:25 am, help bot <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > -------------------------------------------------------------
> > A much, MUCH better example of how
> > this idea is supposed to work can be found
> > if you can locate a video made by an Indiana
> > master who (I believe) drew Emory Tate. As
> > I watched that video, I noticed that his ideas
> > made sense, his analysis had been checked
> > via computer, and yet the moves in the game
> > itself were not exactly brilliant. Sorry, but I
> > don't recall offhand the name of the player
> > who made it; he is I believe ranked #2 or #3
> > in the state of Indiana, and a link may be
> > found at the ISCA Web site.
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Ah, here is the link:
>
> http://www.chessvideos.tv/forum/about1434.html
>
> It is by Dennis Monokroussos. I think you
> will notice a titanic difference in the quality of
> chess analysis.
>
> -- help bot

Yah. That is really good.

Date: 23 Feb 2008 02:39:07
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Why not a pawn fork

On Feb 23, 4:25 am, help bot <[email protected] > wrote:

> -------------------------------------------------------------
> A much, MUCH better example of how
> this idea is supposed to work can be found
> if you can locate a video made by an Indiana
> master who (I believe) drew Emory Tate. As
> I watched that video, I noticed that his ideas
> made sense, his analysis had been checked
> via computer, and yet the moves in the game
> itself were not exactly brilliant. Sorry, but I
> don't recall offhand the name of the player
> who made it; he is I believe ranked #2 or #3
> in the state of Indiana, and a link may be
> found at the ISCA Web site.
> --------------------------------------------------------------

Ah, here is the link:

http://www.chessvideos.tv/forum/about1434.html

It is by Dennis Monokroussos. I think you
will notice a titanic difference in the quality of
chess analysis.

-- help bot

Date: 23 Feb 2008 01:25:36
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Why not a pawn fork

On Feb 21, 11:42 pm, Terry <[email protected] > wrote:

> >> It looks like a pawn fork for black would have given him the
> >> advantage.
>
> >> I am sure I am missing something.
>
> >>http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4013737198399816667&q=chess+q...
>
> >The game is a Queen's Gambit Accepted.
>
> I am not a very good chess player, but I play at Yahoo all the time.
>
> I play the Queen Gambit every time.
>
> I have been watching a few vids about it.
>
> I have yet to see anyone show the trap you can get if you get a pawn
> to d5.
>
> You can get a knight or a bishop at b4 with Qa4 Check.
>
> It happen pretty often in my rookie games.

You would be well advised to ignore this
video, as that game was very poorly played,
and (quite obviously) between two complete
patzers.

-------------------------------------------------------------
A much, MUCH better example of how
this idea is supposed to work can be found
if you can locate a video made by an Indiana
master who (I believe) drew Emory Tate. As
I watched that video, I noticed that his ideas
made sense, his analysis had been checked
via computer, and yet the moves in the game
itself were not exactly brilliant. Sorry, but I
don;t recall offhand the name of the player
who made it; he is I believe ranked #2 or #3
in the state of Indiana, and a link may be
found at the ISCA Web site.
--------------------------------------------------------------

Is it just me, or do the pieces appear to be
a little blurry? The music is excellent, and
his speed in moving through the game was
certainly quick enough, but good gawd, I do
not know when I have seen worse analysis,
or more wrong-headed ideas tossed in.
There ought to be a law against exceedingly
weak players attempting "instructional"
videos like this one; draw the line at, say,
USCF 1600 or so.

-- help bot

Date: 21 Feb 2008 23:42:36
From: Terry
Subject: Re: Why not a pawn fork

On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 17:47:28 -0800 (PST), Offramp
<[email protected] > wrote:

>On Feb 21, 10:11 pm, Terry <[email protected]> wrote:
>> It looks like a pawn fork for black would have given him the
>> advantage.
>>
>> I am sure I am missing something.
>>
>> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4013737198399816667&q=chess+q...
>
>The game is a Queen's Gambit Accepted.

I am not a very good chess player, but I play at Yahoo all the time.

I play the Queen Gambit every time.

I have been watching a few vids about it.

I have yet to see anyone show the trap you can get if you get a pawn
to d5.

You can get a knight or a bishop at b4 with Qa4 Check.

It happen pretty often in my rookie games.

Date: 21 Feb 2008 17:16:51
From: Offramp
Subject: Re: Why not a pawn fork

On Feb 21, 10:11 pm, Terry <[email protected] > wrote:
> It looks like a pawn fork for black would have given him the
> advantage.
>
> I am sure I am missing something.
>
> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4013737198399816667&q=chess+q...

The man mentions the pawn fork, he says that both he and his opponent
"looked it over", by which I think he means they overlooked it. At the
first opportunity, before black has castled, it looks a bit risky, and
after fxe3 it looks even riskier, but betweentimes it looks okay.

What chess program is he using?