That’s what I might play too, though I’d find it annoying that Nc3 blocks the Queen’s access to b3 in a strong line against the Bg4 Philidor (dxe5 Bxf3; Qxf3 dxe5; Bc4 and Qb3).
Alternatively as usual I’d be tempted by Ne2 then my usual donk line of d4/Be3/f3/Qd2/0-0-0 with pressure on d5/d6 and the pawn storm from hell coming with g4/h4 etc.
But yes - the point is that if you’re playing 3+2 and can rattle off 10 or 12 instant moves in the opening you can gain a decent advantage on the clock. I usually aim to have my 3 minutes still intact as long as possible.
Sharing this with players of the white side of the Lopez (Spanish).
This is a line I stumbled upon against the stodgy Old Stenitz Defence of the Spanish that’s popular online.
Black often plays an early Nxd4, thinking the exchanges will free him, but after 11.e5 he pretty much has to play the cramping Ne8 (Nh5? Bd2), and 12.Rhe1 leaves him in a bad position with Nd5 coming (+1.9).
What opening prep should be designed to do is get you out of the zone where you don’t have a plan. Like in that line with 3. Nf3, if Bg4 immediately the plan is to chase the bishop away. If Bg4 after d4 then play d5. That’s the entirety of my prep for that position, because after that the instruction is “enjoy two pawns in the center and do normal e4 opening stuff”. And I know what that is, I understand those positions. In other spots my prep goes like 15 moves deep because I don’t understand the position and there are specific ideas I need to use.
Playing through this on the chess.com analysis board is interesting. It suggests that if black delays Bg4 until after d4 (logical and thematic in some similar Spanish lines) white should continue the line I mentioned with dxe5 Bxf3; Qxf3 dxe5; Bc4 Nf6 then the move I missed playing it through my head: Qg3 (0-0 and Rd1 is also strong) with Bh6 in the offing and a solid plus (+1.3).
It’s possible he has the best shot of anyone, because he is capable of beating Magnus at classical and he’s pretty good at rapid/blitz, so Magnus can’t just make 12 draws and destroy him at short time controls like he did Caruana.
The one I felt had the best shot was Karjakin. I’m not as high on Caruana as the rest of the world, though.
As mentioned above, if Anand-Gelfand was a nail biter, then I guess anything is possible. Gelfand would have been such a fraudulent champ, so I’m glad Anand pulled it out. The fact that it was such a struggle made it clear to me that Anand was on the way down. Peak Anand would have put the kind of beat down on Gelfand that Magnus gave Anand himself.
He has a lifetime score of 4-1 with 6 draws at classical games against Carlsen and seems to have overcome the intermittent lack of focus that dogged him when he was younger.
On the other hand match play is very different to tournaments.
Maybe I’m too biased against him based on his early career when I barely thought of him as a top 10 player. Didn’t know he had a 4 1 6 classical record against Magnus. I’ll upgrade him to have a 2.5% chance. 25% if Magnus is under prepared or just in a funk.
I think that was the case with a lot of us - somehow he’s always flown under the radar.
I’ll probably have a punt on him if I can get 2/1 or better because the donk money will be on Carlsen regardless of odds, but his lack of serious match play experience counts against him.
I have been playing a bit more again recently. I don’t want to brag or anything, but I have got my rating over 1400.
One issue I have is that I practice a lot of games against the computer but I find it’s a lot easier to play against people because when I play a person I get to use the time that they are thinking about their move to do my own thinking about the board position and my next move. When I play the computer I’m always using my own time to think because the computer moves instantly. I wish that I could set it so the computer takes 5s to 10s per move or something so it’s a better simulation of playing a person.
Computers play super inhumanly anyway. I hate playing them. I’m constantly second guessing whether what looks like a mistake is really a mistake or whether I’m about to get owned by some engine line.
I’ve been playing 1+1 bullet of late. Never really played bullet before. I’m 1700 to 1750 rated at blitz and rapid and finding it hard to break 1650 at bullet. Not sure if the competition is actually stronger or I’m just worse. The time scrambling is honestly not much worse than 3+0
I have to play 10+0, I am just not fast enough for blitz. I have more fun calculating and I am just not fast enough for blitz so end up playing “hope” chess by playing anything that is first-order reasonable.
I am very much a newb but I find even 15+10 too fast. What is a standard time control of I went to a club IRL? I’d like a game that lasts maybe 45 minutes to an hour.
Don’t know about the US but club players here generally want quite a few games in an evening which usually means max. 15-20 mins each on the clock.
If you get into one of their teams things change - you’ll have one game per evening against a player from another club which is at slower limits.
Ring them up when they open, and ask them?
At very fast time limits many more games are decided by blunders or on time, which has a something of a randomising effect on results and on people’s ratings, I think.
That makes sense. But also a bit funny that all the practice games are at fast time controls but serious games are slower. Doesn’t seem like great training for serious games.
