|
Here are some other cool Scandinavian videos I've been referring to for this game: Bobby Fischer wrecking. Some nerdy guy who gives good explanations. Really basic video for really basic folks. This video gives me a headache due to the poor audio quality, but the content is good! I don't expect most of you to actually watch these, but I'll try to summarize and refer back to them when and if relevant.
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 04:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 18:56 |
|
|
Apparently I'm playing chess in Chess by Post now, so if anyone wants to trounce a newbie send an invite to fatsamurai. I've discovered that most chess players don't like to trash talk because they are boring and bad.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 09:00
|
|
|
Let's do this. The best thing about chess is that because it is: a) Very Popular and b) Always played on the same set board, with the same set rules and movement choices there are only so many permutations of plays available; because we started with +1 Tempo thanks to being White technically we can just follow the permutations of the board down the line selecting the highest probability to win move early on and getting more into the discussion once we start seeing how Black Team reacts. So Pxe5 seems fine. Ignore this I am apparently late to the party on this one. Edit: Oh well the move I would have voted for stands. Yay. I recommend taking a gander at the wiki page on the Scandinavian Defense, the two most popular 3.'s are listed there (Qxd5 or Nf6) Gridlocked fucked around with this message at 10:07 on Jul 12, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 09:49
|
|
|
You're going down, Covski!
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 10:06
|
|
|
 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 You have 24 hours to decide on a move.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 11:03
|
|
|
Fat Samurai posted:You're going down, Covski! Come at me!  Adding you to the list of Chess by Post players.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 11:08
|
|
|
I guess the typical response here would be Pawn D2 to D4. Unless someone else has a better suggestion. So does this tell us anything about our opponents?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 11:08
|
|
|
Why not Bb5? That forces them to sacrifice a piece.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 11:32
|
|
|
Added Space posted:Why not Bb5? That forces them to sacrifice a piece. That might look good on paper, forcing a Bishop or a Queen to come out, but they could also just block that by moving their C7 Pawn to C6. And then both our Bishop and Pawn would be in danger unless we can somehow capitalize on that move. EDIT: Oh wait, we do have a pawn deployed there, and it'll be safe if we force a check like that. So we could use that to take their pawn instead, moving it out of danger from the other Knight and... I'm not really sure where we could go from there. So I won't be changing my vote just yet. Araxxor fucked around with this message at 11:45 on Jul 12, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 11:43
|
|
|
Added Space posted:Why not Bb5? That forces them to sacrifice a piece. They counter c6, which is covered by the Knight and by the b pawn. a) We take the pawn on c6 with ours: They take it back with their pawn on b column. b) We don't: We have to run back with our bishop. Whether we take their pawn with ours or not the end result is our Bishop facing a protected pawn, so we end up running away and wasting a move. EDIT: Also, I'm using Covski as a sparring in our game, and d4 (Advancing our pawn on d just behind the other one is a bitch of a move to deal with, so I'm voting for that. Fat Samurai fucked around with this message at 12:13 on Jul 12, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 12:05
|
|
|
Work-postin', but first instinct is to stick with the previous idea of Nc3.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 12:48
|
|
|
What makes d4 so good? Is it to open up plays from the bishop and the queen?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 12:55
|
|
|
Yeah I don't see the big deal about d4 myself either. Anyone more chess-headed care to elucidate?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 13:48
|
|
|
So if I'm reading this right, the choices are basically between playing it safe to strengthen our defence a little bit, or doing something risky but that would possibly force them into bringing one of their important pieces out of hiding and thus creating an opening for us? I just want to be sure before I think about this some more, I'm having a lot more trouble understanding the chess notation than I really should be
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 13:53
|
|
|
Oops. My bad.
JosephWongKS fucked around with this message at 15:08 on Jul 12, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 14:42
|
|
|
This is not the observer thread friend 
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 15:05
|
|
|
d4 is the correct move here, and here's why (references the videos I posted earlier); It develops a piece to the center, which is always a good move. One might think "Ah, we are sacrificing a pawn for tempo when they capture with their knight. Is that worth it?" To which the answer is "Yes, absolutely!" You see, we're already up a pawn. Once our opponent moves to capture our pawn on d5 with their knight, we move our pawn to c4 on the next move, threatening the knight. We gain extra tempo from this, as they will be forced to move their knight for the third time in the game. That's really bad for Black! There are some fork attacks Black can attempt on us as a result of this line, but I am aware of them from the videos so they will not actually be successful. Black will waste their time. Black will waste their pieces. And when Black has defeated themselves, we will be victorious. Let Black defeat their selves and go d4!
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 15:45
|
|
|
Here is a timestamped video explaining more in-depth why this particular response of ours is best.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 15:52
|
|
|
Specifically, our opponents are playing a line known as the Modern Scandinavian Gambit; gambits are a specific term in chess, called such because they sacrifice pawns in an attempt to gain tempo. If we wanted to accept this gambit, we would protect our pawn with a pawn of our own. The end result would lead to a board where Black is down a pawn, but has significantly better board position than us. Declining the gambit through d4 removes our pawn advantage, but grants us the tempo instead.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 16:27
|
|
|
I may have confused some things there for anyone who actually knows chess super in-depth, my apologies. We don't actually know if our opponent are going to go the specific Modern Scandinavian Gambit video I posted, but I have a feeling. The gambit we are specifically declining with d4 is the Icelandic Gambit, because accepting said gambit tends to be good for Black.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 16:37
|
|
|
sebzilla posted:Yeah I don't see the big deal about d4 myself either. Anyone more chess-headed care to elucidate? Think about the "controlled" squares on the board. Those two pawns in a row are annoying as gently caress, because they are closing development on most of the board by threatening 4 important squares: c5-c6-e5-e6. Now, if you take an opening, any opening, they are going to use those squares. They are kind of important and we're right in the middle of them. - The Knight on Queen side cannot move, because touching the side of the board is mostly a wasted move. Horsies want to be as close to the centre as possible. - Advancing the pawns mean trading, we keep the initiative and gently caress their pawn line a bit. They probably won't. - That means the Bishop on King's side is going to be there for a while. - The Bishop on Queen's side can only move to d7 or f5. Both a bit of a waste, they are not threatening anything important. That's going to keep on happening as long as or pawns are there. Now compare it with our situation, where the Bishops have 2 full lines to run through and the Knights can advance to their natural positions. Not defending our forward pawn means they will probably take it with either Knight or Queen. We can counter that with either c4 or Kc4, respectively, which they cannot take. That forces them to either move back (so lose a turn, meanwhile we keep control of the middle of the board) or charge forward unsupported, which is all kinds of bad idea, specially for the Queen. By our move on turn 4 they have 1 developed knight vs our 2 pieces, and maybe a Queen crying softly because it's all alone in a dangerous spot (probably a5, which is a dangerous spot 2 pawn moves away of being severely inconvenienced)
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 18:09
|
|
|
Now something worth mentioning, mentioned by another video I watched, is the possibility of playing Bishop to b5 in this position, which puts the opponent in check. This was also mentioned in a post by Dr. Fetus:Dr. Fetus posted:That might look good on paper, forcing a Bishop or a Queen to come out, but they could also just block that by moving their C7 Pawn to C6. And then both our Bishop and Pawn would be in danger unless we can somehow capitalize on that move. Now, our opponent's worse move in response is actually the movement of their pawn to c6. We capture, they recapture, and then we need to move back our bishop only one space to c4, an excellent position to be in with no choice of counter attack. This is actually much stronger than the traditional d4 if the opponents make this mistake. The proper response to us moving bishop to b5 is blocking by moving their knight to b7. Our bishop gets to hang out their for a turn whilst we make a standard develop like knight to f3, but will soon be kicked off by a6, a great tempo play for black. So the main upside to this move is it baits our opponent into a not-so-obvious mistake that leaves our board in a great position while still being a pawn up. The main downside, beside the possibility that the play it correctly, is after this execution of moves we are 100% out of runway in terms of play I can easily google for us (though, counter-point, same goes for our opponent and also you guys might want to start doing things off-the-book). I'm still personally rooting for d4, but I have absolutely no problem with the move of bishop to b5 check.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 18:09
|
|
|
Fat Samurai posted:Not defending our forward pawn means they will probably take it with either Knight or Queen. We can counter that with either c4 or Kc4, respectively, which they cannot take. That forces them to either move back (so lose a turn, meanwhile we keep control of the middle of the board) or charge forward unsupported, which is all kinds of bad idea, specially for the Queen. One thing to mention on this if they choose to capture with their queen after we play d4 is that an immediate Kc4 is not the ideal move; it's not a bad one, but we'd preferably like to support our pawn with Kf3, make a play with our kingside bishop to somewhere better, castle, and then finally c4 to attack the queen. The result is much stronger board position that, while delaying the tempo gain on the queen, does not by any means give it up even if Black responds perfectly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 18:14
|
|
|
jon joe posted:Now something worth mentioning, mentioned by another video I watched, is the possibility of playing Bishop to b5 in this position, which puts the opponent in check. This was also mentioned in a post by Dr. Fetus: And of course they could just put their Knight in the way, again using our moves to little to no gain right now. jon joe posted:One thing to mention on this if they choose to capture with their queen after we play d4 is that an immediate Kc4 is not the ideal move; it's not a bad one, but we'd preferably like to support our pawn with Kf3, make a play with our kingside bishop to somewhere better, castle, and then finally c4 to attack the queen. The result is much stronger board position that, while delaying the tempo gain on the queen, does not by any means give it up even if Black responds perfectly. That assumes that the Queen is going to hang around for a while, though. I'd rather take the gains when we can, but I guess that's a bridge to cross when we get there. Gottagofast, damnit!
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 18:17
|
|
|
Fat Samurai posted:
Desiring to play fast and loose aside, there's no reason their not-under-attack queen wouldn't hang around. To do otherwise would be to tempo their selves without us having to commit a move forcing them to, which is even better for us.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 18:20
|
|
|
Primarily I'm hoping that after we d4, our opponents attempts the Portuguese gambit which involves them moving their bishop to g4. Now you may think our natural development their would be our pawn to block the attack on our queen while attacking the bishop, but this is a mistake much in the same way a pawn play is a mistake by our opponent if we were to play our own bishop deep into enemy lines. After our opponent backs off to f5 we're looking at a board where we need to commit to defending our pawn at d5 by playing c4, which leads to a game where we are primarily developing pawns and our opponent is styling with a bunch of cool knights and bishops. It's not the worst thing to happen, but is very annoying and makes for an extremely unbalanced board that can be difficult to analyze. The proper response is knight to f3, blocking the bishop. This gives us breathing room to develop our board in other ways, for example attacking the bishop with pawn to h3.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 18:31
|
|
|
jon joe posted:d4 is the correct move here, and here's why (references the videos I posted earlier); Fat Samurai posted:Think about the "controlled" squares on the board. Yeah, I'm voting d4 after these posts.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
 I'm still making a case for Bb5, which naturally proceeds to this state.Black's queen side pawns and knight are pinned down, the only bad thing is that black gets the first unforced move.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
Added Space posted:
To reiterate earlier, while this state is very good, it only proceeds if black makes the mistake of capturing the bishop with their pawn rather than blocking it with their knight. Blocking with their own bishop is also fine for them, though not as good as blocking with their knight.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 20:50
|
|
|
If they advance their knight we capture it with our bishop. A bishop for a knight is a good trade.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 20:53
|
|
|
Added Space posted:If they advance their knight we capture it with our bishop. A bishop for a knight is a good trade. Sorry, but that's backwards; bishops are worth slightly more than a knight, especially at these early stages of the game. Not to mention that capturing the knight leads to a counter-capture using their bishop or queen, offering a free development that will naturally develop into a queen-side castle.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
Added Space posted:If they advance their knight we capture it with our bishop. A bishop for a knight is a good trade. It also opens the lines for their rook, which usually are a pain to get out
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 20:57
|
|
|
Yeah, my main problem is being too aggressive. Changing vote from Bb5+ to d4
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 21:15
|
|
|
Yeah, something to also keep in mind is how easy/hard it is to send out the back row pieces into active duty. Knights: No need to move the pawns since they can just jump over them. Bishops: Only one pawn diagonally from them needs to be out of the way for them to be ready to go. Rook: Only the pawn in front of them needs to be out of the way, but at minimum it would take a Rook at least 2 turns to be in active duty near the opening stages (since they would have to move vertically, then horizontally to be in a relatively good position), which definitely makes them a pain to send out since 2 turns is a fairly heavy investment. Castling can be a nice way to send a Rook out into active duty faster (while also protecting the King) but there are certain conditions that have to be in effect before you can use that move. Queen: Any of the pawns in front of her would have to be gone, though sending out the Queen early is risky. King: You typically don't want to do this since the objective of the game is to keep the King safe. In the opening stages, you wouldn't want to make the job easier for the opponent unless necessary, since that can give them an advantage since more of their pieces would be in active duty earlier.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 21:24
|
|
|
I'm really looking forward to the sequel, Goons play Texas Hold'em.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 21:45
|
|
|
Covski posted:
Voting for d4. My original idea was Nc3, which would end up Nxd5-Nxd5-Qxd5, which ain't good. Possibilty of playing c4 now, which would end up in a similar situation to Nc3 but at least would leave us with a knight and a pawn taken at the cost of 2 pawns. Another thing to consider: they didn't take the unsupported pawn with their queen, so perhaps our interpretation of Goon-style hyper-aggressive chess was way off. And there's no guarantee that they'll even take the d5 pawn. How would we respond to Ne4? And then Nf2??? Actually, this early on, Kxf2 would counter that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 22:06
|
|
|
My guess is that they're also trying to scout us as well, seeing how we'd respond to these moves.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 22:09
|
|
|
Cloud Potato posted:Another thing to consider: they didn't take the unsupported pawn with their queen, so perhaps our interpretation of Goon-style hyper-aggressive chess was way off. And there's no guarantee that they'll even take the d5 pawn. How would we respond to Ne4? And then Nf2 If they go Knight e4, we move pawn f3 and then if they go knight f2, we capture it with our king and are extremely super happy that our opponents are downright terrible.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 22:12
|
|
|
Though honestly, bishop d3 would be the better immediate response to some bizarre play like Knight e4; only idiots would then go for our f2 pawn, the more likely result is that they'd retreat to f6 where they started.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 22:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 18:56 |
|
|
Actually I take that back a second time, they may be looking to support that awkward move with a bishop to f5 if we tried to play out our own bishop, so the pawn is best to prevent that. tbh though it's not worth thinking out in advance "what if our opponent made this terrible nonsense play?"
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 22:20
|
|