+- Forums (https://www.chessscotland.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Members Only (https://www.chessscotland.com/forum/forum-16.html)
+--- Forum: Online Correspondence Games (https://www.chessscotland.com/forum/forum-24.html)
+--- Thread: MacQueen-Edwards Discussion Thread (/thread-242.html)
Pages:
1
2
MacQueen-Edwards Discussion Thread - Hugh Brechin - 27-03-2012
Well, we definitely need one. Loving it so far.
Re: MacQueen-Edwards Discussion Thread - Clement Sreeves - 27-03-2012
Was wondering what it looks like in here.
Re: MacQueen-Edwards Discussion Thread - Hugh Brechin - 27-03-2012
Like any other thread, really, except people are rather atypically discussing chess!
Re: MacQueen-Edwards Discussion Thread - Hugh Brechin - 28-03-2012
"Why didn't I play 1.d4? 1.e4 is rubbish."
So now you know, folks. Hope everyone's paying attention out there.
Re: MacQueen-Edwards Discussion Thread - robin moore - 28-03-2012
I knew it! That's been the root of my problem for the last 40 years.
Re: MacQueen-Edwards Discussion Thread - Mike Mitchell - 29-03-2012
As a confirmed "d4-o-holic" I can only agree.
Have to say though that the guys descriptions of their thought processes, planning, and choosing of lines is great - gives us hackers a chance to understand what is going on. As already mentioned on the Sreeves-Burnett discussion thread, it is the equivalent of high level coaching, and credit to the players for putting themselves out in this way.
Not that it will ever be of any use to me being a d4-o-holic ;P
Re: MacQueen-Edwards Discussion Thread - Clement Sreeves - 29-03-2012
fwiw
[x] Clement Sreeves would have played 8.c3 in a heartbeat because it's "principled"
[ ] 8...d5 is very much a novelty
[x] there isn't quite sufficient compensation to claim it's equal
Re: MacQueen-Edwards Discussion Thread - Hugh Brechin - 03-04-2012
There's not that much to say about the chess, except that Calum's definitely messed this up and it'll be interesting to see how he tries to salvage the situation.
The trash talk, however, is superb.
"I'm going to lose to Jonny online. This is awful, he's never going to shut up about it."
"I'm sure MacQueen must be worried... if he loses this game I'll never let it rest!!"
Re: MacQueen-Edwards Discussion Thread - Calum MacQueen - 04-04-2012
Cheers for the views/comments guys.
Yeah, basically I was totally lost at some point. I totally forgot to ask myself what the point of Nb6 could be.
I also miscalculated a line. Instead of a3 I can go d3 then c4 DOESN'T work because I can take it, Qxd1 Nxd1 bxc4 and the Be7 hangs!! Doh, that's not very clever.
I presume I'm just gone after a3, all my pieces are junk and it's barely like I can develop them. B-f6xc3 looks like a good plan and I probably am lucky to survive it. Better would have been Bd6 and trying to get a mate on, I've made some weakness with h3 and it's not like my pieces are able to defend very well.
Next time, I'll play a more interesting game I promise
.
Re: MacQueen-Edwards Discussion Thread - Hugh Brechin - 04-04-2012
Cheers for the comments Calum, it was interesting to watch that game unfold.
One thing I'd pick up on from that which is maybe quite interesting - you were seriously discomfited by ...c5, and that was the point at which you thought that your position was clearly worse. However, it was your next move that was the lemon. I just feel that's quite an instructive example of a point that I think John Nunn has made in a couple of books, which is that a bad move quite often follows a less significant oversight: the appearance of a possibility a player hasn't planned for jars him into believing that he's already gone wrong, disturbing his equilibrium and prompting the real mistake.