PDA

View Full Version : qpawn v Rybka (operator ggrayggray)



Garvinator
06-08-2006, 02:32 PM
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6

qpawn
06-08-2006, 06:49 PM
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6

3. c4

Garvinator
06-08-2006, 08:07 PM
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. c4 c5

qpawn
07-08-2006, 07:40 PM
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. c4 c5 4. d5

Garvinator
07-08-2006, 08:35 PM
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. c4 c5 4. d5 exd5

qpawn
08-08-2006, 09:40 PM
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. c4 c5 4. d5 exd5 5. cxd5

Garvinator
08-08-2006, 10:41 PM
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. c4 c5 4. d5 exd5 5. cxd5
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. c4 c5 4. d5 exd5 5. cxd5 d6

qpawn
10-08-2006, 12:28 PM
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. c4 c5 4. d5 exd5 5. cxd5 d6 6. Nc3


I haven't played against a benoni for a long time. But I remember bits and pieces from that game in the Spassky/Fischer match :D

Garvinator
10-08-2006, 12:30 PM
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. c4 c5 4. d5 exd5 5. cxd5 d6 6. Nc3 g6

qpawn
11-08-2006, 10:14 AM
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. c4 c5 4. d5 exd5 5. cxd5 d6 6. Nc3 g6 7. e4

Garvinator
11-08-2006, 12:07 PM
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. c4 c5 4. d5 exd5 5. cxd5 d6 6. Nc3 g6 7. e4 Bg7

Garvinator
12-08-2006, 04:36 PM
cough

qpawn
15-08-2006, 12:53 PM
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. c4 c5 4. d5 exd5 5. cxd5 d6 6. Nc3 g6 7. e4 Bg7 8. Nd2
Thought that I would throw in a bit of anti-benoni theory . Black would like to play ...Bg4 and exchange bishop for knight as soon as white plays Nf3, since the c8 bishop is a major weakness of the entire benoni system. But I am not going to allow that to happen! :owned: Another way to do this would be by h3. But the text is a bit more dynamniic aiming to control light squares to counter black's grabbings for the black squares.

Garvinator
15-08-2006, 01:12 PM
Anti benoni theory in this position, I dont think so.

This is just another 'well known' theory position. White aims to secure the e pawn with f3 and re-route the knight to c4 to pressure the d pawn.

As they say- nothing new under the sun.

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. c4 c5 4. d5 exd5 5. cxd5 d6 6. Nc3 g6 7. e4 Bg7 8. Nd2 0-0

pax
15-08-2006, 01:20 PM
By the short turnaround time, I assume that the position is still in the opening book?

qpawn
15-08-2006, 01:25 PM
Yes. Still in the book.

Interestingly, the database that comes with fritz 8 gives 8. Nd2 a ?

But I found this same position reached in a Polugaevsky vs Cramling game. So Fritz has some weird annotations for opening moves as usual.

Garvinator
15-08-2006, 01:26 PM
By the short turnaround time, I assume that the position is still in the opening book?
yes

Garvinator
23-08-2006, 11:50 AM
8 days since qpawn's last move, that is a ridiculous amount of time between moves. Even in the currently run tournament, where they are playing 14 games at once, they have agreed to a move rate of 7 days. You have timed out, goodbye.

pax
23-08-2006, 02:59 PM
8 days since qpawn's last move, that is a ridiculous amount of time between moves. Even in the currently run tournament, where they are playing 14 games at once, they have agreed to a move rate of 7 days. You have timed out, goodbye.

Jeez Garv, give the guy a chance to explain himself. One problem here, is that you haven't actually agreed to a rate of play.

qpawn
23-08-2006, 06:25 PM
One, I have been a bit busy with other things.

Two, in this game I am waiting for your computer to move: so what on earth are you taking about?

If there was any bloody time limit that is news to me sunshine: this isn't an official ccla game.

And sometimes I take a week to move in those official games but I always meet the time limit.

This was meant to be a bit of fun and stuff. But I don't think that you have the patience for the excercise.

Garvinator
23-08-2006, 06:29 PM
One, I have been a bit busy with other things. you have posted on other threads and been online.


Two, in this game I am waiting for your computer to move: so what on earth are you taking about? From post 14: 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. c4 c5 4. d5 exd5 5. cxd5 d6 6. Nc3 g6 7. e4 Bg7 8. Nd2 0-0.
As you can see I have played 0-0.


This was meant to be a bit of fun and stuff. But I don't think that you have the patience for the excercise.
you have been the one criticising and saying how you were going to destroy any computer programs and also criticising the moves played. Now you say that it is just all fun and stuff. I have called you on this by claiming a double forfeit you have made absolutely no attempt to participate in either game for over a week. Quite simply not good enough.

qpawn
23-08-2006, 09:31 PM
OK. stuff you. You want rybka to win by a double forfeit. Then you can have one.

Bye bye.