Your network blocks the Lichess assets!

lichess.org
Donate

The French Defense is no longer playable.

@loristavernier said in #42:

Do you all want me to tell you what you want to hear ?
I don't get the point of doing that, especially since I am giving viable arguments that are showing that the french is unplayble.

I am about to do the same with carokann even though I AM A CAROKANN PLAYER AS WELL AS I WAS A FRENCH DEFENSE PLAYER.
It's nothing personal guys and the fact that people who can't even fully read a blog want to comment this blog is funny as hell.

https://lichess.org/LEots16v#18

man, you played b5... how can you even make blogs like that then? you don't understand totally what you are doing, that what i was talking about, those positions are not straightforward for white at all

@loristavernier said in #42: > Do you all want me to tell you what you want to hear ? > I don't get the point of doing that, especially since I am giving viable arguments that are showing that the french is unplayble. > > I am about to do the same with carokann even though I AM A CAROKANN PLAYER AS WELL AS I WAS A FRENCH DEFENSE PLAYER. > It's nothing personal guys and the fact that people who can't even fully read a blog want to comment this blog is funny as hell. https://lichess.org/LEots16v#18 man, you played b5... how can you even make blogs like that then? you don't understand totally what you are doing, that what i was talking about, those positions are not straightforward for white at all

@Interesting_choice said in #46:

You can say the same about 1.e5 or Sicilian) There is always some variation where white has a high win rate, in which case it is better to just resign after 1.e4?

I don't use the winrate as an argument, since someone can blunder in the middlegame or in the endgame.

@Interesting_choice said in #46: > You can say the same about 1.e5 or Sicilian) There is always some variation where white has a high win rate, in which case it is better to just resign after 1.e4? I don't use the winrate as an argument, since someone can blunder in the middlegame or in the endgame.

@loristavernier said in #51:

I don't use the winrate as an argument, since someone can blunder in the middlegame or in the endgame.
if you don't do so then why your variation is better than for example e4 e6 b3!? or for example tarrasch. White's play is also easy there

@loristavernier said in #51: > I don't use the winrate as an argument, since someone can blunder in the middlegame or in the endgame. if you don't do so then why your variation is better than for example e4 e6 b3!? or for example tarrasch. White's play is also easy there

@Interesting_choice said in #52:

if you don't do so then why your variation is better than for example e4 e6 b3!? or for example tarrasch. White's play is also easy there

I am judging and basing my arguments on the "easyness" of a position. I am basing myself on the type of moves and efforts black and white have to put into a move to make the right decision.

@Interesting_choice said in #52: > if you don't do so then why your variation is better than for example e4 e6 b3!? or for example tarrasch. White's play is also easy there I am judging and basing my arguments on the "easyness" of a position. I am basing myself on the type of moves and efforts black and white have to put into a move to make the right decision.

@loristavernier said in #53:

I am judging and basing my arguments on the "easyness" of a position. I am basing myself on the type of moves and efforts black and white have to put into a move to make the right decision.
That is, according to you, the position is easy to play for white. Then why did you go b5 in that game? Can you at least explain to me why white plays a3 b4? Because if you play b5, then apparently you don't understand. Any position can seem simple if you watch one of the best players in the world outplay a chess player of a lower class. As was rightly noted earlier, I can send you a bunch of opposite examples where the player with black (who is simply stronger) outplays a weaker opponent who plays white pieces. Again, you have the right to your opinion (even if you don't understand these positions for white at all). In general, I often meet people who don't understand anything and try to be smart like you are doing now. Make a title like "French is unplayable opening", attach a game where black lost not because of the opening, but because of the level, have no knowledge in these variations for white and still defend your point of view so fiercely because either you are a stubborn person who is ashamed to admit his mistakes or just stupid who is always sure of what he says. For me, such blogs are absolutely nothing special, as are such people. But if you listened to what I (and others) write to you, you would understand that the problem is not in your subjective opinion, but in the fact that you are trying to make this subjective opinion objective

@loristavernier said in #53: > I am judging and basing my arguments on the "easyness" of a position. I am basing myself on the type of moves and efforts black and white have to put into a move to make the right decision. That is, according to you, the position is easy to play for white. Then why did you go b5 in that game? Can you at least explain to me why white plays a3 b4? Because if you play b5, then apparently you don't understand. Any position can seem simple if you watch one of the best players in the world outplay a chess player of a lower class. As was rightly noted earlier, I can send you a bunch of opposite examples where the player with black (who is simply stronger) outplays a weaker opponent who plays white pieces. Again, you have the right to your opinion (even if you don't understand these positions for white at all). In general, I often meet people who don't understand anything and try to be smart like you are doing now. Make a title like "French is unplayable opening", attach a game where black lost not because of the opening, but because of the level, have no knowledge in these variations for white and still defend your point of view so fiercely because either you are a stubborn person who is ashamed to admit his mistakes or just stupid who is always sure of what he says. For me, such blogs are absolutely nothing special, as are such people. But if you listened to what I (and others) write to you, you would understand that the problem is not in your subjective opinion, but in the fact that you are trying to make this subjective opinion objective

@Interesting_choice said in #54:

That is, according to you, the position is easy to play for white. Then why did you go b5 in that game? Can you at least explain to me why white plays a3 b4? Because if you play b5, then apparently you don't understand. Any position can seem simple if you watch one of the best players in the world outplay a chess player of a lower class. As was rightly noted earlier, I can send you a bunch of opposite examples where the player with black (who is simply stronger) outplays a weaker opponent who plays white pieces. Again, you have the right to your opinion (even if you don't understand these positions for white at all). In general, I often meet people who don't understand anything and try to be smart like you are doing now. Make a title like "French is unplayable opening", attach a game where black lost not because of the opening, but because of the level, have no knowledge in these variations for white and still defend your point of view so fiercely because either you are a stubborn person who is ashamed to admit his mistakes or just stupid who is always sure of what he says. For me, such blogs are absolutely nothing special, as are such people. But if you listened to what I (and others) write to you, you would understand that the problem is not in your subjective opinion, but in the fact that you are trying to make this subjective opinion objective

Okok, I won't read your comments where you pretend that I like the simplicity of GM's winning and that I use it randomly. I played a3 and b4 because, even though I didn't think that I would have to say that, I don't play my repertoire online, so of course I won't play my plan but second of all I played practically thinking for some strange reasons that I was under some strange pressure that I put on myself for no reason.

I regret that I couldn't defend my position better than that.

@Interesting_choice said in #54: > That is, according to you, the position is easy to play for white. Then why did you go b5 in that game? Can you at least explain to me why white plays a3 b4? Because if you play b5, then apparently you don't understand. Any position can seem simple if you watch one of the best players in the world outplay a chess player of a lower class. As was rightly noted earlier, I can send you a bunch of opposite examples where the player with black (who is simply stronger) outplays a weaker opponent who plays white pieces. Again, you have the right to your opinion (even if you don't understand these positions for white at all). In general, I often meet people who don't understand anything and try to be smart like you are doing now. Make a title like "French is unplayable opening", attach a game where black lost not because of the opening, but because of the level, have no knowledge in these variations for white and still defend your point of view so fiercely because either you are a stubborn person who is ashamed to admit his mistakes or just stupid who is always sure of what he says. For me, such blogs are absolutely nothing special, as are such people. But if you listened to what I (and others) write to you, you would understand that the problem is not in your subjective opinion, but in the fact that you are trying to make this subjective opinion objective Okok, I won't read your comments where you pretend that I like the simplicity of GM's winning and that I use it randomly. I played a3 and b4 because, even though I didn't think that I would have to say that, I don't play my repertoire online, so of course I won't play my plan but second of all I played practically thinking for some strange reasons that I was under some strange pressure that I put on myself for no reason. I regret that I couldn't defend my position better than that.

@Interesting_choice said in #54:

That is, according to you, the position is easy to play for white. Then why did you go b5 in that game? Can you at least explain to me why white plays a3 b4? Because if you play b5, then apparently you don't understand. Any position can seem simple if you watch one of the best players in the world outplay a chess player of a lower class. As was rightly noted earlier, I can send you a bunch of opposite examples where the player with black (who is simply stronger) outplays a weaker opponent who plays white pieces. Again, you have the right to your opinion (even if you don't understand these positions for white at all). In general, I often meet people who don't understand anything and try to be smart like you are doing now. Make a title like "French is unplayable opening", attach a game where black lost not because of the opening, but because of the level, have no knowledge in these variations for white and still defend your point of view so fiercely because either you are a stubborn person who is ashamed to admit his mistakes or just stupid who is always sure of what he says. For me, such blogs are absolutely nothing special, as are such people. But if you listened to what I (and others) write to you, you would understand that the problem is not in your subjective opinion, but in the fact that you are trying to make this subjective opinion objective

Whomp whomp

@Interesting_choice said in #54: > That is, according to you, the position is easy to play for white. Then why did you go b5 in that game? Can you at least explain to me why white plays a3 b4? Because if you play b5, then apparently you don't understand. Any position can seem simple if you watch one of the best players in the world outplay a chess player of a lower class. As was rightly noted earlier, I can send you a bunch of opposite examples where the player with black (who is simply stronger) outplays a weaker opponent who plays white pieces. Again, you have the right to your opinion (even if you don't understand these positions for white at all). In general, I often meet people who don't understand anything and try to be smart like you are doing now. Make a title like "French is unplayable opening", attach a game where black lost not because of the opening, but because of the level, have no knowledge in these variations for white and still defend your point of view so fiercely because either you are a stubborn person who is ashamed to admit his mistakes or just stupid who is always sure of what he says. For me, such blogs are absolutely nothing special, as are such people. But if you listened to what I (and others) write to you, you would understand that the problem is not in your subjective opinion, but in the fact that you are trying to make this subjective opinion objective Whomp whomp

@loristavernier said in #55:

Okok, I won't read your comments where you pretend that I like the simplicity of GM's winning and that I use it randomly. I played a3 and b4 because, even though I didn't think that I would have to say that, I don't play my repertoire online, so of course I won't play my plan but second of all I played practically thinking for some strange reasons that I was under some strange pressure that I put on myself for no reason.

I regret that I couldn't defend my position better than that.
hahaha, come on, read what you write) you mean that you don't play your plans online because someone can prepare against you and you don't want to be in that situation? I will surprise you. When you created a lichess account, put your first and last name and then created a blog about this variation for white then every opponent of yours will know what you are playing and it doesn't matter if you played b5 or actually the right sequence

@loristavernier said in #55: > Okok, I won't read your comments where you pretend that I like the simplicity of GM's winning and that I use it randomly. I played a3 and b4 because, even though I didn't think that I would have to say that, I don't play my repertoire online, so of course I won't play my plan but second of all I played practically thinking for some strange reasons that I was under some strange pressure that I put on myself for no reason. > > I regret that I couldn't defend my position better than that. hahaha, come on, read what you write) you mean that you don't play your plans online because someone can prepare against you and you don't want to be in that situation? I will surprise you. When you created a lichess account, put your first and last name and then created a blog about this variation for white then every opponent of yours will know what you are playing and it doesn't matter if you played b5 or actually the right sequence

@loristavernier said in #55:

Okok, I won't read your comments where you pretend that I like the simplicity of GM's winning and that I use it randomly. I played a3 and b4 because, even though I didn't think that I would have to say that, I don't play my repertoire online, so of course I won't play my plan but second of all I played practically thinking for some strange reasons that I was under some strange pressure that I put on myself for no reason.

I regret that I couldn't defend my position better than that.
Anyway, let's end this conversation, I'm getting bored

@loristavernier said in #55: > Okok, I won't read your comments where you pretend that I like the simplicity of GM's winning and that I use it randomly. I played a3 and b4 because, even though I didn't think that I would have to say that, I don't play my repertoire online, so of course I won't play my plan but second of all I played practically thinking for some strange reasons that I was under some strange pressure that I put on myself for no reason. > > I regret that I couldn't defend my position better than that. Anyway, let's end this conversation, I'm getting bored

@Interesting_choice said in #57:

hahaha, come on, read what you write) you mean that you don't play your plans online because someone can prepare against you and you don't want to be in that situation. I will surprise you. When you created a lichess account, put your first and last name and then created a blog about this variation for white then every opponent of yours will know what you are playing and it doesn't matter if you played b5 or actually the right sequence

No, it's just that I didn't play my plan, this time I don't know what I have written, my bad.
Let me reanswer :
I somehow didn't care and somehow I put some pressure on my head for no reason XD

@Interesting_choice said in #57: > hahaha, come on, read what you write) you mean that you don't play your plans online because someone can prepare against you and you don't want to be in that situation. I will surprise you. When you created a lichess account, put your first and last name and then created a blog about this variation for white then every opponent of yours will know what you are playing and it doesn't matter if you played b5 or actually the right sequence No, it's just that I didn't play my plan, this time I don't know what I have written, my bad. Let me reanswer : I somehow didn't care and somehow I put some pressure on my head for no reason XD

This topic is now closed.