After 6 moves white developed 3 pieces. After 5 moves Black developed 1 piece. That isn't White's fault.

The Najdorf is popular at the very top levels, so Black must be achieving something in spite of his apparent lack of development.

The classical variation (Nc6) is also a popular continuation.

This is a well known line that GM's still play. While development is important you shouldn't think that this line is bad for Black. Many World Champions have used it and won!

Fischer's favourite

my favorite.

11 moves & White has 5 pieces out & can castle on either side. 11 moves & Black has 2 pieces out. Still not White's fault.

I've never studied Be3 against the Najdorf (it became popular after I was playing the White side of this) but Black's play seems to be thematic to the Najdorf generally rather than this variation. By playing f3, White has a solid centre, and Black is going to have decide what to do with his king, he's going to have to look at whether Bd7 actually achieves anything because otherwise the bishop is better sitting on by, slightly out of the way, but discouraging White from playing f4, and he's going to have decide where he's going to advance his pawns to break up White's position. I don't like 9. ...b4 either.

So would I & I'm only a 1505 player.

The knight is threatened and has nowhere to move, so defending it is obvious.

Black's play is insipid. Why any half decent player would exchange the Ne5 for the Bd3 when the latter is confined to pawn duties is beyond me. It reeks of a computer programmed to over-value bishops.

15... Rc8? 16. Nc2 attacking b4 and now ...d5 is the only move to defend it but then 17. e5 forces the knight to retreat to g8 or h7.

He is defending the advanced pawn.

Rc8 or Rb8 would've worked. I would've chosen Rb8 because then, as nuntar said, d5 would've been the only way to protect the pawn. Logically, white will push the pawn to e5, and force the knight to retreat.

See? You're rated 70 points lower than goff & you know. Chapt 2 of "My System" is on open files.

My play too.

"To obtain a rook on the seventh is equivalent to a great advantage" -- Golombek

Yes I know & I'm still a 1505 player. Chapt 3 of "My System" is on the 7th & 8th ranks.

Yes, but let's go back to White's 18th move, shall we? Black simply replies 18...Qxa2, and White loses a pawn. I showed this move to seven humans and one computer, and only the computer found 19 Na4, trapping the Queen. As it happens, none of the humans play chess or even know how the pieces move. But still...this could be the kind of evidence the goffr was accumulating.

thanks flatlander,   i like your humor. goeffredob didn't take the pawn so he must have seen it (so that would mean goffredob was using a computer?! ok, just kidding). As for myself, I would have been willing to sacrifice that pawn just to get my rooks doubled on an open file. trapping the queen was a bonus

your comments are the perfect mirror of your behaviour.

Perhaps if you allowed discussion, people might take you more seriously. I doubt his play was made by a computer, because of one simple fact: Computers do NOT understand positional play.

I think black should go for the thematic central break here with e5 and d5.It may still be losing but seems a better try than going over to passive defence.

Possibly regrouping, opening f6 for the bishop, which was passive on e7. If the rook moves, the knight can move to f8, a very good square for defensive purposes. It's just a pity that here the move loses on the spot for tactical reasons.

What happens if, instead of Nh7, black just keeps offering the exchange of the rooks with Rb8

I've been told, " A knight on the rim is dim." For example Nh7.

Of more immediate concern is the fork of Black's rook and bishop. Since 23... Rb8 fails (24. Rxb8 Qxb8 25. Nxd7) there is no way for Black to avoid losing material.

This is a pretty nice fork, actually, winning material regardless of what black decides to play.

nice move  

Very obvious.

I missed it for a moment. But yes, I think that anyone with reasonable experience and 10 seconds to think would realise that.

That's sensible: he's down on material, and so he should avoid exchanges.

There is always someone who makes this accusation, despite obviously playing within the expectations of one's rating. No proof, of course.

Very well played. I got a similar accusation on the FICS after my opponent blundered horribly. I enjoy losing and working out where i went wrong - it is great for increasing your rating and improving in general. This guy is a very sad individual. Of course, how could anybody beat an 1891 rated player? Its just unthinkable. He must think he is a super GM, arrogant *******

Zug wins 56%, loses 35%, & draws 9%. He is an A player. You're ok Zug. gg To whom it may concern: Zug won by: 1 placing his rooks on the open file, & 2 taking the 7th rank. Read "My System" by Nimzovich. That's why I only played correspondence until I won 5 games. Now I can create puzzles & leave comments. I play only blitz. Here you can meet the sport that declines a draw in a K vs. K ending so he can 'win" on time. His counterpart avoids mate in 1 by not moving & loses on time.

@ goffredob: maybe it´s just a good chess player? when someone´s better than u it doesn´t say he´s a cheater. however, i enjoyed reading this game. good work, zugzwänger!

Wow, very poor sportsmanship indeed... But there's nothing you can do about it but to ignore such players.

Any chess player should be able to find a reasonable move in two days, or more, depening on the time control. If it were blitz chess, and the moves really did feel computer-like, then the argument would be more valid. I'm not taking sides, but after all, this is correspondence chess...

Dear Goffredob. You made a pretty nasty accusation. Normally I would be complimented if someone told me I played as good as a computer. In this case, the compliment is undeserved. Did you make any aggressive moves at all in our game? I don't think so. You just let me put my rooks and my knight in the best possible spots availble to them and then tell me I must be cheating when I win? Then, immediatly after making that comment, you put me on ignore, knowing full well that I would have some questions about your comment. Then, when an interesting discussion is generated here, your contribution is to cry "Full Stop!"? Cmon Goffredob. Relax.

You will see in the future if this guy is using some software or not. This is my opinion. Take a look at his 13/16 won games in "theoden123's mini-tournament III" mini tournament. The OTHER (not this guy pay attention) leader is a clear cheater. I said something similar to "you play like a computer"... for me it's not important if it seems me to play against my Fritz... I don't like to play with him. If he's not using external helps better for him. I have nothing at all against him and I'm happy to be denied. I observed his castling on an open side (My System who?), his N moves, his center handling and I guessed he's using something to control the moves to avoid blunders. Play play against him and have fun. Full stop !

"My System" is Nimzowitsch's most famous work.

White's play is simplistic, Black's play is insipid and, frankly, helpful to White. You don't need to study the position for hours to see White's moves. I'm against you Goffredob.

I´ve played several games with zugzwanger and every time had good games. Won and lost.