Not actually fourth best ever for his age. That was a list of notables (with emphasis on Americans for comparison), but was by no means comprehensive. Karjakin and Hou Yifan were definitely both rated higher than him at the same age, off the top of my head, and I think there are a few others as well.

None of which is meant to take away from the indisputable fact that his accomplishment is extraordinary.

Oh, I was wondering why they weren't on the list; now I understand that it wasn't meant to be comprehensive.

Competitive sports are getting younger, that's impressive

A composed game in the Grob.

That's a great queen sac! For some reason I chuckled when White played c4 and Qd1-b3xb7, as if it was a Slav misplayed by Black in a usual fashion.
________________________________

Oops, I've just discovered that one of my former local club mates, Maksim Omariev, became an FM in 2010 (at 19), is now 2304, 51 point down from his Sept 2011 peak but still rated 65 points higher than our then coach FM (then CM) Alexey Vas. Druzhinin. What a surprise! The former was a bit weaker than me and seemingly less serious 13 years ago when we last met (he was 10). Now the kid has grown up.

(Short-Biyiasas, 1979)

Was going through some positions and this came up.

White won with



I saw and didn't consider looking for another move. Am I missing a defence here? (have no engine to check now)

Stockfish says:

thanks

Another win for Wei Yi (this time over GM Lupulescu [2643]) and with that he passes Hou Yifan and becomes the 8th highest rated Chinese player, and 69th highest rated player in the world. Live rating of 2674.4, and his last four classical games have been wins over GMs (average opponent rating: 2617).

Seven days from now he will turn 15 1/2 years old.

After deep consideration and research, I have a seismic shift in cutting-edge theory:

1. d4? has been changed to 1. d4!

What lines have changed the evaluation?

Ah, thanks.

A bit tilting that Palliser's book only gives Short's move as the solution

Way to make a noob like me go nuts thinking "what am I missing?!"

Stonewall pawn structure is just pure amateur nuts.

Not if Black plays 3... Bf5! (which an amateur can do by accident if not by knowledge). That c4 hasn't been played is a problem - White has no Qb3 that would force that bishop back.

*shrug* bring it. I'll play the white side of that against just about anyone at my level and be pretty happy. It's technical equality without (at the amateur level) practical equality.

A good thing is that 1... d5 players will have to manage to meet 2. e3 by an immediate Bf5, otherwise you'll play 3. Bd3 and this bishop will be hard to challenge.

However, don't try it at home vs 1... Nf6, as 2. e3 will often be met by g6 (or 2... d5 3. c4 g6) and you'll end up in a KID/Grunfeld a tempo down because they'll render the pawn hardly useful on e3, while your DSB will be 'bad'. (If Black is a known Nimzo/Bogo/Queen's Indian specialist and plays e6 instead of g6, you'll have an easier time for sure).

Fortunately, it turns out the Stonewall formation can work well for White if used when Black responds by 2... e6 to the Trompowsky, as seen in this article. Here, White's DSB gets developed before the c1-h6 diagonal is closed by pawns, which is usually a plus in 1. d4 positions (where the pawn stuck on d4 prevents q-side fianchetto from working as well).

A separate repertoire vs 1. d4 Nf6 2. Bg5 Ne4 is of course to be worked out.

Sorry for overcomplicating, I'm just feeling that club players are likely to find the 'refutations' out of their heads, they seem intuitively visible to me.

The refutations are theory. In practice, there are equal positions I want to play and equal positions I don't.

But I'm also not talking about any specific lines. Just very general ideas.

Well, I hate having a bad bishop - it's a general idea.

Coincidentally, just yesterday, I started thinking about addressing the bad Black LSB issue in the Dutch (which is especially painful if White plays 2. g3!, making fianchettoing to b7 harder), which is obv the Black version of what you're considering, so I happen to be pretty interested

I had a friend who played the Stonewall and he usually played Bd7 - e8 - h5 as a manoeuvre to make use of the bishop. No idea about the same idea in reverse but it looks feasible.

Hmm, that 'Snake Dutch' is rare, sounds interesting. Usually, the LSB remains undeveloped for 10-15 moves because Black has plenty of problems to solve in the Dutch Stonewall, especially after Nh3!, as explained in Dereque Kelley's video on the variation.

It would be a nightmare for White if Black managed to play Nh6 in the reverse Stonewall, and maybe some players familiar with the mirror move in the Dutch do so; weak club opponents are more likely to develop the knight to f6, but even then life is not easy for White, Black will gain initiative on the q-side, and in this case, the h4 bishop will be offside and have to move back.

Bc1-g5-h4 still sounds better to me than Bc1-d2-e1-h4, at least because it takes one tempo less.

The Leningrad Dutch (with Nc6) looks more attractive than the Stonewall Dutch to me as Black, though if White knows the d5, Qb3, c5, Nc3-a4, Bd2-a5 setup, life isn't easy on c7. Kh8, h6, Qe8, a6, Rb8, b6, Bb7 is a rare defensive setup vs it, but I need to test it in practice before I ever believe that it doesn't work.

Fun exercise (on the harder side).



Black's last move was 1.-Rb8.

a) What positactical idea* does 2. Ba7 attempt to facilitate?
b) Why does it fail?




*Amalgam of "positional" and "tactical": a positional idea executed via tactical means.

I love how the game is essentially a long chain of tactical ideas. That was the goal.

^

so my rating is about 1400-1500. How much work would I have to put in to get up to say, 2000?

I am basically a casual player and I have never done anything other than playing a lot of online games.

What standard do the top 3 min + 2 second players play at? I.E if you analysed their games for good play and errors, what ELO would it correspond to with normal time controls?