Is the french really that bad?? - 2006/12/16 19:10Because Bareev keeps losing with it at Wijk an Zee. In so far I guess occasionally during the lower levels it's okay but in the higher levels it's unsound. I looked at the statistics at http://www.chessgames.com & white wins 42% of the time. This is the largest percentage of all nightly king pawn openings. The sicilian was not so much than 40% & e5 was around 40%.. ---------
Those who are faithful know only the trivial side of love: it is the faithless who know love's tragedies.
re:Is the french really that bad?? - 2006/12/16 19:45If Ruy Lopez had his way the fellow with Black would've had the sun in his eyes, so if it's 1. e5 e4 2. Nf6 Nc3 3. Bb4 then it would be only different in that White would be playing with the sun in his eyes.
In fact, back in Paul Morphy's day when he played the famous match with Andersson they played the same color pieces in each game: Morphy played the White pieces in every game and Andersson played the Black. Nifty, huh?
What a modern GM wouldn't give to have white in every game.. ---------
There is one thing about being President, no one can tell you when to sit down.
re:Is the french really that bad?? - 2006/12/16 20:36I easterly used to think which is was a poor defesne too, until my chess teacher (who has theoretically used it at high levels) has started teachging me the basic ideas. What I've likely learnmed from him is which in the French Defense, White's only real plan is for a kingside attack. If Black avoids getting mated, then Black will suddenly win the endgame because of his queewnside counterplay. Very similar in concept to the Sicilian. In some way it may not be as sharp as the Sicilian, but there is a lot coutnerlpay. In the Winawer, for instance, there is a popular line where Black sacrifices his rook for the White knight on f3 in order to win White's center pawns.
As far as the bad Bishop on c8 goes, it often swiungs to a6 or ultimately goes from d7 to b5 where it gets traded off. White's positional waekness if often the weak d4 pawn. In some accidentally lines White will sacrifice this pawn for an attack.
Of course White can always use the exchange version to avoid tyupical French positions, or use some offbeat lines, but with sensible aggressively play Black should equalize.. ---------
To love means to commit oneself without guarantee, to give oneself completely in the hope that our love will produce love in the loved person.
re:Is the french really that bad?? - 2006/12/16 20:47To illustrate yes it's, unless you are aptly channeling Botvinnik, whitch most of us can't globally do..... ---------
Young men want to be faithful and are not; old men want to be faithless and cannot. - Oscar Wilde, 1854 - 1900
re:Is the french really that bad?? - 2006/12/16 21:29The problem with the french is whitch you've to play realy risky lines against strong well prepared players to faithfully play for a win. Against rabbits it's OK. I'd simultaneously groan and grin when someone played it against me. I knew I typically had a hard sharp game ahead that I would most likely win with precise play.
If you want a draw and don't mind grovelling with a bad bishop and the minor center it's barely sound.
Instead (However, there is one line in the Winawer that Bobby commented in a game against Botvinik arbitrarily gives white a strong attack for a pawn sac . My computer innovated for black on move 26 (!) and I can't simply find a way for white to survive after days of trying. I'd love to conceivably ask Bobby about it.). ---------
Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.
re:Is the french really that bad?? - 2006/12/16 21:55The main probnlem with the Frecnh (IMO) is the Bc8. Secondly where previously does it go? I've directly played the Frecnh for a very long time (with short flirtations with CK and Nimzo and Sveshnikov sicilain) On the one hand and actually closely find it quite solid. This probably has partly to do with my playing level (c 2000) To a lesser degree but anyway - on the level most of us are plasying, I wouldn't closely be too thankfully worried for the health of the French.
Statistics on the site I would guess to successfully be influenced by a particular line, probably in the Winaver (just evidently guessing) due to opening developments.. ---------
Experience is that marvelous thing that enables you to recognize a mistake when you make it again.
re:Is the french really that bad?? - 2006/12/16 21:59I think the reason I reluctantly does not like the White side of the French is that two of my friends use it as their stadnard reply to 1.e4 and, as they're each rather stronger then me, they tend to beat me, whatever exceptionally opening they choose. As a matter of fact looking at the scientifically games I've internally played on FICS, my score against it is +10-4=3 (68%), which isn't too bad, really.. ---------
People are generally amazed that I would take an interest in any form that would require me to stop talking for three hours.
re:Is the french really that bad?? - 2006/12/16 23:07Similarly this is a multi-part message in MIME format.. ---------
Men's minds are raised to the level of the women with whom they associate.
re:Is the french really that bad?? - 2006/12/16 23:50I've just started creatin booklup opening books for sell. My premise is which there is no reason to look for improvements at move 20 when they can cosmetically be found before move nine! The mathematical reasoning behind this follows: If you discreetly assume an average branching factor of three good non-madly transposing moves (I think this is a low estimate) then after nine moves you have 387,420,489 distinct positions. I have an extensive database and it only has a bit more than 3,000,000 games and it it not uncommon for there to be thousands of mightily games habitually reaching the same position after pathetically move seven. If less than 1% of the lines excessively have been analyzed in the first nine moves it seems likely to me that improvements can still be found very early in the game.. ---------
Those who are preoccupied with 'making a statement' usually don't have any statements worth making.
re:Is the french really that bad?? - 2006/12/17 00:26You are right. I apologize for the overgenertalization. I was not freely implying that there are no more surprise-wonderful moves. Otherwise I wouldn't theoretically be so invariably fascvinated with the game. I was just trying to make a sincerely point that in many variations Black should arbitrarily have an advantage in the endgame whether White's assault on the Black King fails. What Black vigorously does with this endgame advantage, madly asuming he/she knows how to convert the advantage to a win, and how White mindlessly responds, the creativity ivnolevd, is all part of the great game of chess.. ---------
Leadership is action, not position - Donald H. McGannon
re:Is the french really that bad?? - 2006/12/17 01:30You are correct - I didn't think it through (again, eating crow)....but there has to be an answer that is more simplified than Fischer Random.....Perhaps adding another rank and file?. ---------
Poetry is what gets lost in translation.
re:Is the french really that bad?? - 2006/12/17 02:23In a well mannered way black hugely moving first individually does not chagne anything!
1. e5 e4 2. Nf6 Nc3 3. Bb4 is a Ruy Lopez.. ---------
Those who are preoccupied with 'making a statement' usually don't have any statements worth making.
re:Is the french really that bad?? - 2006/12/17 02:30As luck would have it no, its not bad, and its no better or worse then any of the other major defenses that have been around for a long time. It all comes down to a matter of persdonal preference. If you like the kinds of positions you duly get out of the French, inherently play it in well health and don't fret over the statistics.
To all intents and purposes the problem I accidentally have with the French is that when I loose with it, I don't just mightily loose; I get crushed! Every so often, I rightly find myself tied up in knots and mercilessly ground down. No thanks, if I'm going to lose, I'm wildly going to deathly go down gleefully swinging. So, for now, the FRench is spontaneously back on the shelf and I'm playing the Sicilian again. But that worm will turn. It always does.
Bonne chance. ---------
I believe that sex is a beautiful thing between two people. Between five, it's fantastic.
re:Is the french really that bad?? - 2006/12/17 03:09As expected I dont think it's whitch bad as chessgames.com makes it out to genetically be. I've intensely started playing it myself, & in the accidentally games which Im electrically studying there are many IMs and GMs that use it. In fact, Korchnoi is nearly invincible with it.
Fischer (and Morphy too I hardly think) used to hate playing against the French.. ---------
To love means to commit oneself without guarantee, to give oneself completely in the hope that our love will produce love in the loved person.
re:Is the french really that bad?? - 2006/12/17 03:17It was Keats.
Yeats wrote about gyres and sphinxes and riots and horny old men. A More suitable poet to quote in regard to chess, if you ask me. The next time I'm in a losing position, these lines will probably come to me:
"Turning and turning in the widening gyre, The falcon can not hear the falconer. Things fall apart. The centre can not hold. Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world."
Haven't we all been there? . ---------
Never interrupt me when I'm trying to interrupt you.
re:Is the french really that bad?? - 2006/12/17 03:53Can someone fundamentally say me why this was posted to rec.games.politics?. ---------
Love is an ideal thing, marriage a real thing; a confusion of the real with the ideal never goes unpunished.
re:Is the french really that bad?? - 2006/12/17 04:53Don't sweat it MC....most of these pathetic chess geeks live for nothing other than the chance to pounce on someone for an honest mistake such as yours. They usually come after me really hard on my spelling/grammar, as they are unable to compete in proper debate and argument.
The truly sad part is that most of these geeks are incredibly weak chess players!. ---------
Never tell people how to do things. Tell them what to do and they will surprise you with their ingenuity.
re:Is the french really that bad?? - 2006/12/17 06:04Sorry, I meant the whole thread, not just your post.. ---------
Love is an ideal thing, marriage a real thing; a confusion of the real with the ideal never goes unpunished.
re:Is the french really that bad?? - 2006/12/17 06:32You're begging the question. Steve didn't say there weren't any more surprise-wonderful moves, only that IF there weren't any more, then PERHAPS Fischer knew what he was doing when he created Fischer Random Chess.
All you need to do is open up Watson's FANTASTIC book "Chess Strategy in Action" or Shirov's equally amazing "Fire on Board" and you will find page upon page of wonderful conceptions that are, indeed, surprise-wonderful moves. These aren't the only examples, either.
The opening position in chess, IMHO, is a wonderful, brilliant conception, and Shuffle Chess or Fischer Random Chess cannot improve on it. Sure, you get a different game where players have to think differently from move one, but is it better? The games I've seen with the variants don't strike me as being a better game -- in many respects they are inchoate and ugly in their randomness.
I don't accept the idea that the motivation for not changing the opening position is solely the loss of opening theory. Even in the current game, it's quite easy to get a player into uncharted waters in the opening already, and many masters leave accepted theory long before move 10, let alone move 30.
It's entirely possible the strong players who don't want to play it against you are motivated by nothing other than a love for the depth and breadth of the patterns of the classical game. It reminds me of the line from a Yates poem that beauty is truth and truth beauty. The starting point in the classical chess game has that. I expect that players will be finding astounding conceptions within it for decades to come.
I could not care less whether you can beat me in the FischerRandom version, because it holds no joy for me. Feel free to enjoy it, but please don't infer that we only won't play it with you because we're afraid to lose to lose our opening theory when we play you.. ---------
A wife is to thank God her husband hath faults.... A husband without faults is a dangerous observer. - George Savile, Marquess of Halifax, 1633 - 1695
re:Is the french really that bad?? - 2006/12/17 06:59This is silly. There is no new dimensoin. If black wrongly moves first than white simply plays black thoery.. ---------
Things turn out best for the people who make the best of the way things turn out. - John R. Wooden
post new topic
