Author: Bigler
Date: 02:35:47 02/10/06
Go up one level in this thread
On February 10, 2006 at 05:10:31, Heinz van Kempen wrote: >On February 10, 2006 at 05:02:23, Bigler wrote: > >>Hi ! >> >>I have to say as for white, 1.b4 is that convincing in the sense that if you >>want to fight for an advantage, this is not so good. There are ways for black to >>have an equal position (do not misunderstand me, not drawing position). >>One example could be the variation after 1.b4 d5 2.Bb2 Qd6. >>I don’t want to discuss too much variations and analysis. >> >>As a general "law", I would say that when playing white colour, you have 1 tempo >>in advance that you should use the more efficiently. >>In the past, I used to play 1.f4 with very interesting games. >>After discussing with GM Petr Kiriakov, he convinced me that ok, 1.f4 or 1.b3 or >>etc is not bad, but by not playing 1.e4 or 1.d4 you already loose the advantage >>of playing white. >> >>I have to say, today that I agree with this argument. >> >>best regards > >Hi Bigler, > >after games with the top engines it might happen that we share your view, which >is quite common amongst chessplayers. It may also be that engines detect >something worth studying a bit more here. > >Best Regards >Heinz Hi ! Thanks for your answer. I think that you can see nice wins for white. But after years of using computers, analysing openings and games, I dont think that computer will find a move that will show to the humans that you can really fight for an advantage after 1.b4. Of course in some variations, computers can find improvments over actual theory on this opening, but nothing that says that 1.b4 is really fighting for an advantage. But still, looking forward to see that I'm wrong. Best regards
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.