wolfleader, show a sample game
King's Gambit v.s Queen's Gambit
Sort:
LavaRook wrote:
The wildest you can get in the QG is in the Semi-Slav Botvinnik as well as the Semi-Slav Anti Moscow.
And that's not wild enough? In my opinion these variations are as wild as anything you can play after 1. e4.
Schachgeek wrote:
The queens gambit is boring compared to the kings gambit.
But the QG tends to be favored by players who don't want an early brawl, as well as players who are too lazy/afraid to calculate (ruy, sicilianor kg lines). Many QG lines one can play in their sleep.
Not so of the KG or anything that emanates from 1. e4, you have to be alert throughout.
What I find hard to accept that people often seem to suggest that all d4 openings are by nature lame compared to e4 openings. I kind of understand when relative beginners say this since their experience obivously is very limited but coming from 2500+ player this sound very suprising to me.
I accept that on average e4 openings may be more tactical by nature but there are also extremely sharp lines in d4-openings. Lot depends on the player behind the white pieces: young Kasparov used mostly d4 and Ivan Sokolov is one modern example of a very principled attacking player who almost exclusively plays 1. d4.
And what's that bit about Ruy: I thought that the long main lines of Ruy are something that OTB players use in the early morning rounds after a drunken night because here you can play first 20+ moves on autopilot without calculating anything?!
Jun 7, 2010
0
#25
If it weren't for that pesky thing that the Queen's Gambit isn't really a gambit, then I would say that the following equation holds
Queen's Gambit >> King's Gambit
Jun 7, 2010
0
#26
You know, because you can factor out the Gambit and the Queen can move more quickly than the King.
Schachgeek wrote:
FirebrandX wrote:
Shakaali wrote:
What I find hard to accept that people often seem to suggest that all d4 openings are by nature lame compared to e4 openings. I kind of understand when relative beginners say this since their experience obivously is very limited but coming from 2500+ player this sound very suprising to me.
Not surprising considering his 1500 blitz rating.
Ticket #151957 filed.
Apparently both of you have never heard of unrated games? Snide remarks in the forums will reported, count on it.
Seriously? Reported for this? You'd have someone banned for this?
Schachgeek wrote:
Ticket #151957 filed.
Apparently both of you have never heard of unrated games? Snide remarks in the forums will reported, count on it.
What's this? Did I somehow manage to hurt your feelings or am I missing something? If that bit of me being suprised that a 2500+ player said those things about e4 and d4 openings was offending then I've obviously got no hope because I must be offending people all the time without even noticing it.
Jun 8, 2010
0
#29
Guys, don't worry too much - any user-based reporting system worth its salt gives a lower weight to frequent (read: trivial) reporters. It's the old case of dispute resolution, which for example the credit cards do very well. Customer C reports a complaint against merchant M - what to do? Well.. maybe C reports against lots of merchants. Or maybe M receives lots of complaints. If the messages are reported in good faith, then there's nothing to worry about.
i play queen's gambit most of the time
sometimes if im bored i play king's gambit and i lose most of the time...lol (probably cuz im not familiar with it)
Schachgeek wrote:
Seriously, my finding closed positions "boring" is a matter of personal taste...but when people use that as an opportunity to take a "poke" at me without justification, it's offensive.
But don't worry you likely won't get banned for one forum comment unless it's really evil and nasty. If staff responds at all, you might get a friendly little reminder from the sheriff.
Now...if you were to amass a handful of these tickets, then you might have cause for concern.
I was not concerned that I would get banned for this because I never really believed that this would happen. However, I was concerned that you found my comment offensive because this was not my intention. Quite on contrary I very much respect higher rated people but for this very reason I was so suprised to read that someone rated 2500+ so categorically seems to think that closed positions are boring because I was not really excpecting that. So while I obviously have different opinions and maybe presented my point bit provocatively I was certainly not aiming to make any personal attack against you.
Some have very, very thin skin in this day and age in which someone, somewhere will be "offended" by anything said......
I thought people got reported for abuse but Schachgeek has evolved this to "snide remarks" (Good Lord! snide remarks! we never have those in the Chess.com forums!). What's next? "I've reported you for saying something that I don't like"? seems to be the way it's going.
Tip for Schachgeek (as my Father would say to me, when I was a little lad, growing up):
You are big enough and ugly enough to look after yourself now.
in other words...
Stop pestering the site admins and defend yourself, all this publicly brandishing ticket numbers does nothing but reinforce what many of us already think of you.
Just one more boring closed game:
PrawnEatsPrawn wrote:
I thought people got reported for abuse but Schachgeek has evolved this to "snide remarks" (Good Lord! snide remarks! we never have those in the Chess.com forums!). What's next? "I've reported you for saying something that I don't like"? seems to be the way it's going.
Tip for Schachgeek (as my Father would say to me, when I was a little lad, growing up):
You are big enough and ugly enough to look after yourself now.
in other words...
Stop pestering the site admins and defend yourself, all this publicly brandishing ticket numbers does nothing but reinforce what many of us already think of you.
But what do many of us think of him?
He's a hell of a nice guy, making chess.com shinier and happier by the moment.
"But what do many of us think of him? "
I play Queen's Gambit and it may not have rapid results but it's a very sharp responsibility
BorgQueen wrote:
Boring just means "I don't know what's going on."
I didn't read past this as your post lost all credibility with that statement alone.
If you look it up in the dictionary, I think you'll find a very different meaning for "boring".
Of course his definition is not meant to be taken 100% literally.
I do agree with anthony here; most positions that are "boring" to people are just ones where when they try to find something to do they just run into a brick wall because they don't understand the position. Few closed positions are truly without activity for one side or the other, and grandmasters always seem to have a nice idea of what to do in quiet positions and enjoy slowly improving the position due to a deep strategy.
I used to find chess incredibly boring, and this was because I noticed better players attacking me but when I tried to attack I would always fail. I didn't understand why I can attack and why I can't, why I lose even after developing my pieces to great squares (knights on f3 and c3, put a pawn in the center, so logical!). Back years ago, chess to me was just about holding on to your pieces and develop your knights to c3 and f3, and I thought it was just pointless and boring. Learning strategy was what made chess so fun for me.
King's Gambit may not be very good, but it can be very fun a full of surprises! Good against an unprepared opponent.
when i play Queen's gambit, my queenside weaken very easily... please help with that...