White 07

cheesehead · 2013-08-28, 00:36

(What's with those leading-zeros on move numbers ???)

I think we can assume 6 ... d6 after 6 Be3 for purposes of discussion.

cheesehead · 2013-08-28, 01:01

If 6 ... d6
7.Qd2

LaurV · 2013-08-28, 15:23

I am not very convinced they won't reply Nd4...
Let's live and see....

For d6, I have nothing against Qd2, it looks "classical"...

cheesehead · 2013-08-28, 23:06

[QUOTE=LaurV;351144]I am not very convinced they won't reply Nd4...
Let's live and see....[/QUOTE]But ... but ...
[QUOTE=WMHalsdorf;350855]6. Be3 forcing a response of d6 (all other moves are bad for black).[/QUOTE]I guess we didn't finish that discussion of how 6 ... Nd4 would be bad for Black.

Basically, at move 6 [I]Black simply doesn't yet have enough development to sustain the N outpost on d4[/I]. 6 ... Nd4 becomes a Black sacrifice of two tempi for naught (or less) ... not at all in keeping with the spirit of 1 ... c5 !

ECO cites:

6 ... Nd4 7. Nce2 e6 8. c3 [just like I said earlier] [sup]*[/sup]Nxe2 9. Nxe2 Ne7 10. Qd2 Bd7 11. [sup]*[/sup]Bh6 0-0 12. h4 +=

(... where Black sacrifices two tempi to help White both advance the c3 pawn to attack the black center square (and counter the Bg7 on that long diagonal) and develop his Ng1, plus either start attacking Black's castled King or consolidate as in [sup]*[/sup]11. d4 variation below)

with [sup]*[/sup]variations, also +=

[sup]*[/sup] 8 ... Nc6 9. d4 cxd4 10. Nxd4 Nxd4 11. Bxd4 e5 12. Be3 Ne7 13. Ne2 0-0 14. 0-0 Be6 15. Qd2 +=

(... in which Black sacrifices a different pair of tempi to allow White to proceed in the center ...)

[sup]*[/sup] or 11. d4 Qc7 12.0-0 +=

(... in which Black has sacrificed the same pair of tempi as in the first line, to allow White to proceed in center slightly differently ...)

WMHalsdorf · 2013-08-29, 18:40

As far as I'm concerned we have 5 moves to concider with my current rankings
7. Nge2 5
7. Qd2 5
7. Nf3 4
7. Nh3 3
7. f4 1

cheesehead · 2013-08-29, 21:33

Now that I see that someone has actually gone to the extra trouble of inserting a leading zero into the title I gave this thread:

I ask again,
[QUOTE=cheesehead;351062](What's with those leading-zeros on move numbers ???)[/QUOTE]Show me where any notable chess publication uses leading zeros.

- -

(Comment: At this point in this opening, we have a somewhat remarkable situation in which every possible move by White's KN is plausible. Also, two other plausible candidates, Qd2 and f4, each preserve the future viability of all three KN moves. Since I've hardly ever played the Sicilian, and never before played this line, I greatly enjoy finding such tidbits. I'll post my move-rankings shortly.)

LaurV · 2013-08-30, 06:33

I was the one starting the fashion with zeroes (and WMH followed), as the subforum is then easier to sort by threads' names. It was initially more of a joke, related to how we used to give funny names to the threads of the former game, during Dublow's era, he started that. However, the idea with zeroes is more useful than it seems. When no zero, "move 10" will appear [B]before[/B] "move 2" .. "move 9" (as is first in lexicographic sorting), but after "move 1", creating confusion if someone will want to follow the game after one year, move by move (as is is now with the former game). Sorting by time (of the last posts) is not helpful either, because as you can see in the Gecko's topics of the former game, for some moves the discussion continued for long after other moves were made, or topics were created in advance in anticipation of the adversary's play. I justified this (see the first post in move 05).

However, [B][U]it wasn't me who edited your title[/U][/B]. It must have been a supermod which is also programmer and knows. Try to create 25 files in your computer, name them from "file 1" to "file 25" and then try sorting them with your file explorer, you will see that regardless the tricks you do, "file 2" came always between "file 19" and "file 20", for example, and "file 3" to "file 9" come at the end (after "file 25") when sorted in increasing order. Therefore I [U]do[/U] agree with whoever supermod changed the title.

Of course, you are not obliged to follow, and I will *not* change your titles. In no way I will ever edit someone's posts, except in case they are really offending for other members.

Back to chess, you (both) almost convinced me with that Qd2, however, please allow me the weekend to go through all the analysis you did, check it and understanding it, before giving my move. I would normally play Nf3 here, but "if two or three people tell you that you are drunk, then you better go to sleep"...

cheesehead · 2013-08-30, 07:59

[QUOTE=LaurV;351345]I was the one starting the fashion with zeroes (and WMH followed), as the subforum is then easier to sort by threads' names. < snip >[/QUOTE]So basically the sorting used here is faulty (it doesn't handle numbers correctly).

Perhaps it uses only lexicographical order, which treats digits only as individual characters ("21" is treated as "2", followed by "1") rather than treating groups of digits as numbers ("21" is treated as 21).

[quote]However, [B][U]it wasn't me who edited your title[/U][/B].[/quote]I never accused anyone, and I really don't care [I]who[/I] changed it, just [I]why[/I].

[quote]It must have been a supermod which is also programmer and knows.[/quote]A proper programmer would know that it's quite possible to have the sorter handle numbers correctly.

[quote]Try to create 25 files in your computer, name them from "file 1" to "file 25" and then try sorting them with your file explorer,[/quote]Okay, though I shortened the procedure by creating only File 1, File 2, File 9, File 10, File 16, and File 21.

[quote] you will see that regardless the tricks you do, "file 2" came always between "file 19" and "file 20", for example, and "file 3" to "file 9" come at the end (after "file 25") when sorted in increasing order.[/quote]No, that's _NOT_ what I see.

I see my files listed in correct order (File 1, File 2, File 9, File 10, File 16, File 21). None of the ordering anomalies you list occur.

Your file explorer may be using only lexicographic ordering ("21 = "2", "1") rather than treating digit strings as numbers ("21" = 21, which is 2 more than 19, and 88 less than 109). Windows Explorer (file explorer, not Internet Explorer) sorts them in the proper order - File 2, then File 9 before File 10 and File 16, treating strings of digits as single numbers rather than merely multi-character strings.

- - -

Maybe your file explorer offers an option to sort numbers according to numerical order ("2", "9", "19", "21") rather than lexicographical order ("19", "2", "21", "9")

fivemack · 2013-08-30, 09:56

[quote]So basically the sorting used here is faulty (it doesn't handle numbers correctly).[/quote]

True, but hard to change; so add the leading zeroes.

LaurV · 2013-08-30, 10:10

[edit: this was @cheesehead, because crosspost with fivemack]:

hehe, you are right! I just tried that in both win7 and win xp and it is as you said!

(thinking to myself... who the hack is using windows explorer today? one of the stupidest file browsers I ever seen...:razz:)

cheesehead · 2013-08-31, 15:10

[QUOTE=LaurV;351361]

hehe, you are right! I just tried that in both win7 and win xp and it is as you said![/quote]OTOH, the report from a Windows search uses lexicographic order: file1, file10, file11, file12, file2, file3 ... file9

[quote](thinking to myself... who the hack is using windows explorer today? one of the stupidest file browsers I ever seen...:razz:)[/QUOTE]What do you use?

2013-08-28, 00:36	#1
cheesehead "Richard B. Woods" Aug 2002 Wisconsin USA 2²×3×641 Posts	White 07 (What's with those leading-zeros on move numbers ???) I think we can assume 6 ... d6 after 6 Be3 for purposes of discussion. Last fiddled with by cheesehead on 2013-08-28 at 00:38

2013-08-28, 01:01	#2
cheesehead "Richard B. Woods" Aug 2002 Wisconsin USA 2²×3×641 Posts	If 6 ... d6 7.Qd2 Last fiddled with by cheesehead on 2013-08-28 at 01:01

2013-08-28, 23:06	#4
cheesehead "Richard B. Woods" Aug 2002 Wisconsin USA 2²×3×641 Posts	[QUOTE=LaurV;351144]I am not very convinced they won't reply Nd4... Let's live and see....[/QUOTE]But ... but ... [QUOTE=WMHalsdorf;350855]6. Be3 forcing a response of d6 (all other moves are bad for black).[/QUOTE]I guess we didn't finish that discussion of how 6 ... Nd4 would be bad for Black. Basically, at move 6 [I]Black simply doesn't yet have enough development to sustain the N outpost on d4[/I]. 6 ... Nd4 becomes a Black sacrifice of two tempi for naught (or less) ... not at all in keeping with the spirit of 1 ... c5 ! ECO cites: 6 ... Nd4 7. Nce2 e6 8. c3 [just like I said earlier] [sup][/sup]Nxe2 9. Nxe2 Ne7 10. Qd2 Bd7 11. [sup][/sup]Bh6 0-0 12. h4 += (... where Black sacrifices two tempi to help White both advance the c3 pawn to attack the black center square (and counter the Bg7 on that long diagonal) and develop his Ng1, plus either start attacking Black's castled King or consolidate as in [sup][/sup]11. d4 variation below) with [sup][/sup]variations, also += [sup][/sup] 8 ... Nc6 9. d4 cxd4 10. Nxd4 Nxd4 11. Bxd4 e5 12. Be3 Ne7 13. Ne2 0-0 14. 0-0 Be6 15. Qd2 += (... in which Black sacrifices a different pair of tempi to allow White to proceed in the center ...) [sup][/sup] or 11. d4 Qc7 12.0-0 += (... in which Black has sacrificed the same pair of tempi as in the first line, to allow White to proceed in center slightly differently ...) Last fiddled with by cheesehead on 2013-08-29 at 00:05

2013-08-29, 21:33	#6
cheesehead "Richard B. Woods" Aug 2002 Wisconsin USA 2²·3·641 Posts	Now that I see that someone has actually gone to the extra trouble of inserting a leading zero into the title I gave this thread: I ask again, [QUOTE=cheesehead;351062](What's with those leading-zeros on move numbers ???)[/QUOTE]Show me where any notable chess publication uses leading zeros. - - (Comment: At this point in this opening, we have a somewhat remarkable situation in which every possible move by White's KN is plausible. Also, two other plausible candidates, Qd2 and f4, each preserve the future viability of all three KN moves. Since I've hardly ever played the Sicilian, and never before played this line, I greatly enjoy finding such tidbits. I'll post my move-rankings shortly.) Last fiddled with by cheesehead on 2013-08-29 at 22:10

2013-08-30, 07:59	#8
cheesehead "Richard B. Woods" Aug 2002 Wisconsin USA 2²×3×641 Posts	[QUOTE=LaurV;351345]I was the one starting the fashion with zeroes (and WMH followed), as the subforum is then easier to sort by threads' names. < snip >[/QUOTE]So basically the sorting used here is faulty (it doesn't handle numbers correctly). Perhaps it uses only lexicographical order, which treats digits only as individual characters ("21" is treated as "2", followed by "1") rather than treating groups of digits as numbers ("21" is treated as 21). [quote]However, [B][U]it wasn't me who edited your title[/U][/B].[/quote]I never accused anyone, and I really don't care [I]who[/I] changed it, just [I]why[/I]. [quote]It must have been a supermod which is also programmer and knows.[/quote]A proper programmer would know that it's quite possible to have the sorter handle numbers correctly. [quote]Try to create 25 files in your computer, name them from "file 1" to "file 25" and then try sorting them with your file explorer,[/quote]Okay, though I shortened the procedure by creating only File 1, File 2, File 9, File 10, File 16, and File 21. [quote] you will see that regardless the tricks you do, "file 2" came always between "file 19" and "file 20", for example, and "file 3" to "file 9" come at the end (after "file 25") when sorted in increasing order.[/quote]No, that's _NOT_ what I see. I see my files listed in correct order (File 1, File 2, File 9, File 10, File 16, File 21). None of the ordering anomalies you list occur. Your file explorer may be using only lexicographic ordering ("21 = "2", "1") rather than treating digit strings as numbers ("21" = 21, which is 2 more than 19, and 88 less than 109). Windows Explorer (file explorer, not Internet Explorer) sorts them in the proper order - File 2, then File 9 before File 10 and File 16, treating strings of digits as single numbers rather than merely multi-character strings. - - - Maybe your file explorer offers an option to sort numbers according to numerical order ("2", "9", "19", "21") rather than lexicographical order ("19", "2", "21", "9") Last fiddled with by cheesehead on 2013-08-30 at 08:11

2013-08-28, 15:23	#3
LaurV Romulan Interpreter "name field" Jun 2011 Thailand 41×251 Posts	I am not very convinced they won't reply Nd4... Let's live and see.... For d6, I have nothing against Qd2, it looks "classical"...

2013-08-29, 18:40	#5
WMHalsdorf Feb 2005 Bristol, CT 1001₈ Posts	As far as I'm concerned we have 5 moves to concider with my current rankings 7. Nge2 5 7. Qd2 5 7. Nf3 4 7. Nh3 3 7. f4 1

2013-08-30, 06:33	#7
LaurV Romulan Interpreter "name field" Jun 2011 Thailand 10291₁₀ Posts	I was the one starting the fashion with zeroes (and WMH followed), as the subforum is then easier to sort by threads' names. It was initially more of a joke, related to how we used to give funny names to the threads of the former game, during Dublow's era, he started that. However, the idea with zeroes is more useful than it seems. When no zero, "move 10" will appear [B]before[/B] "move 2" .. "move 9" (as is first in lexicographic sorting), but after "move 1", creating confusion if someone will want to follow the game after one year, move by move (as is is now with the former game). Sorting by time (of the last posts) is not helpful either, because as you can see in the Gecko's topics of the former game, for some moves the discussion continued for long after other moves were made, or topics were created in advance in anticipation of the adversary's play. I justified this (see the first post in move 05). However, [B][U]it wasn't me who edited your title[/U][/B]. It must have been a supermod which is also programmer and knows. Try to create 25 files in your computer, name them from "file 1" to "file 25" and then try sorting them with your file explorer, you will see that regardless the tricks you do, "file 2" came always between "file 19" and "file 20", for example, and "file 3" to "file 9" come at the end (after "file 25") when sorted in increasing order. Therefore I [U]do[/U] agree with whoever supermod changed the title. Of course, you are not obliged to follow, and I will not change your titles. In no way I will ever edit someone's posts, except in case they are really offending for other members. Back to chess, you (both) almost convinced me with that Qd2, however, please allow me the weekend to go through all the analysis you did, check it and understanding it, before giving my move. I would normally play Nf3 here, but "if two or three people tell you that you are drunk, then you better go to sleep"...

2013-08-30, 09:56	#9
fivemack (loop (#_fork)) Feb 2006 Cambridge, England 2×7×461 Posts	[quote]So basically the sorting used here is faulty (it doesn't handle numbers correctly).[/quote] True, but hard to change; so add the leading zeroes.

2013-08-30, 10:10	#10
LaurV Romulan Interpreter "name field" Jun 2011 Thailand 41×251 Posts	[edit: this was @cheesehead, because crosspost with fivemack]: hehe, you are right! I just tried that in both win7 and win xp and it is as you said! (thinking to myself... who the hack is using windows explorer today? one of the stupidest file browsers I ever seen...:razz:) Last fiddled with by LaurV on 2013-08-30 at 10:17

2013-08-31, 15:10	#11
cheesehead "Richard B. Woods" Aug 2002 Wisconsin USA 1E0C₁₆ Posts	[QUOTE=LaurV;351361] hehe, you are right! I just tried that in both win7 and win xp and it is as you said![/quote]OTOH, the report from a Windows search uses lexicographic order: file1, file10, file11, file12, file2, file3 ... file9 [quote](thinking to myself... who the hack is using windows explorer today? one of the stupidest file browsers I ever seen...:razz:)[/QUOTE]What do you use?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
White 20	cheesehead	Game 2 - ♔♕♙♘♖♙ - Shaolin Pirates	23	2014-02-13 08:04
White 19	cheesehead	Game 2 - ♔♕♙♘♖♙ - Shaolin Pirates	12	2014-01-31 20:14
White 18	cheesehead	Game 2 - ♔♕♙♘♖♙ - Shaolin Pirates	16	2014-01-24 22:11
White 17	cheesehead	Game 2 - ♔♕♙♘♖♙ - Shaolin Pirates	22	2013-12-20 18:11
White 16	LaurV	Game 2 - ♔♕♙♘♖♙ - Shaolin Pirates	15	2013-12-08 10:49