Timeline for Why wasn't this strategy chosen?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 29, 2017 at 21:30 | vote | accept | Jossie Calderon | ||
| Nov 29, 2017 at 21:28 | comment | added | Jossie Calderon | @evargalo that would bias the question. As you can see, everyone (such as deduplicator and others) are taking this position and the moves for granted. It's better to use NN-NN. | |
| Nov 29, 2017 at 21:22 | comment | added | Jossie Calderon | @themathemagician it's a semi-closed position. Three moves is fine. And a7-a5 was played to prevent b4. | |
| Nov 29, 2017 at 11:13 | comment | added | TheMathemagician | Your comments seem strange to me (2000 ELO). The knight might be slightly better on c5 then d5 (I'm not even sure about that) but you can't possibly spend three moves getting it there. Then you talk about Black's hold on the a5 pawn weakening ... what White pieces are attacking a5? (None). The position is basically a reversed Sicilian where Black doesn't even have the development lead to compensate for a worse structure. | |
| Nov 29, 2017 at 10:26 | answer | added | Evargalo | timeline score: 5 | |
| Nov 29, 2017 at 9:39 | comment | added | Evargalo | I think you should precise in the question that this position comes from the famous game Bobby Fischer - Ulf Andersson in 1970: chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1019452 . The birth of the plan with Kh1-Rg1-g4 in the (reverse) Hedgehog ! | |
| Nov 29, 2017 at 9:30 | answer | added | Lyudmil Tsvetkov | timeline score: 0 | |
| Nov 28, 2017 at 22:56 | answer | added | Ywapom | timeline score: 0 | |
| Nov 28, 2017 at 18:31 | history | edited | Jossie Calderon | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 47 characters in body
|
| Nov 28, 2017 at 18:07 | history | edited | Jossie Calderon | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 49 characters in body
|
| Nov 28, 2017 at 17:59 | history | asked | Jossie Calderon | CC BY-SA 3.0 |