Real chess ?

Main

Date: 15 Apr 2008 10:11:09
From: Mike Murray
Subject: Real chess ?

Over on Playchess.com yesterday, I was playing Black in a 5-minute
game. The game opened 1 d4 Nc6, 2 Nf3 d5, 3 Bf4 Bg4, 4 e3 f6. At
this point, my opponent, evidently a German player with a FIDE rating
of about 2240, resigned! I sent him a message asking why he resigned.
He replied, "I want to play real chess".

Hmmmm.

Date: 15 Apr 2008 11:21:49
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Real chess ?

On Apr 15, 11:11 am, Mike Murray <[email protected] > wrote:
> Over on Playchess.com yesterday, I was playing Black in a 5-minute
> game. The game opened 1 d4 Nc6, 2 Nf3 d5, 3 Bf4 Bg4, 4 e3 f6. At
> this point, my opponent, evidently a German player with a FIDE rating
> of about 2240, resigned! I sent him a message asking why he resigned.
> He replied, "I want to play real chess".

Granted perhaps that 4. ... f6 maybe was not a grandmaster level move,
the guy is just a rude jerk and should be ignored no matter what his
FIDE rating. He could have been polite enough to finish the game and
move on, or, if he didn't want to play a lower rated player, not have
accepted the game in the first place. But there are all sorts of
people on line and unfortunately not all of them are nice.

Date: 16 Apr 2008 16:55:17
From:
Subject: Re: Real chess ?

On Apr 16, 6:54=A0pm, Guy Macon <http://www.guymacon.com/ > wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> >As far as I know, Philidor never played
> >Philidor's Defense, Maroczy never played the Maroczy Bind (he played
> >against it), Allgaier published analysis of Alekhine's Defense 100
> >years before Alekhine ever played it, and no Dutch player of note was
> >ever partial to the Dutch Defense.
>
> Ah but has an actual hedgehog ever played the hedgehog? =A0:)

Hmmm, an interesting question. Has any reigning queen ever played
the Queen's Gambit? Have any two knights ever actually played the Two
Knights' Defense? Have four knights, in consultation, ever played the
Four Knights Game? More specifically, have four knights from Sicily
played the Sicilian Four Knights variation? Has a bishop ever played
the Bishop's Opening? Has any aged person of native American or Hindu
extraction ever played the Old Indian? Has a certified scholar ever
played Scholar's Mate? Did Bird ever try the Wing Gambit? Has a
dragon ever played the Dragon? Has an orangutan ever played 1.b4?
Such are the deep mysteries of our game.

Date: 16 Apr 2008 22:54:53
From: Guy Macon
Subject: Re: Real chess ?

[email protected] wrote:

>As far as I know, Philidor never played
>Philidor's Defense, Maroczy never played the Maroczy Bind (he played
>against it), Allgaier published analysis of Alekhine's Defense 100
>years before Alekhine ever played it, and no Dutch player of note was
>ever partial to the Dutch Defense.

Ah but has an actual hedgehog ever played the hedgehog? :)

Date: 16 Apr 2008 14:30:01
From:
Subject: Re: Real chess ?

On Apr 16, 4:16=A0pm, Mike Murray <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:13:37 -0700 (PDT), [email protected] wrote:
> >> You think the "Chigorin" name only applies if the White c-pawn has
> >> moved to c4? Most of the books I've read seem to apply it to the
> >> structure of d4/d5 pawns bumping heads combined with the Black QN
> >> blocking the Black QBP.
> > =A0Mike, your comment prompted me to do a little research on Chigorin's
> >repertoire. My CB database lists 38 games where Chigorin had Black and
> >the game began 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 or 1.Nf3 d5 2.d4. There was not a single
> >one in which Chigorin replied 2...Nc6. His most common replies were
> >2...Nf6, 2...Bg4 and 2...e6. There were about seven instances where
> >played ...Nb8-c6 with his c-pawn still on c7, usually when he had
> >played 2...Bg4 (and never when he had played 2...e6), but these were
> >only in games where White first played c2-c4, and a subsequent ...Nc6
> >allowed a transposition to a more or less normal line of the Chigorin
> >Defense to the QGD.
> > =A0So if some books are giving the name "Chigorin Defense" to anything
> >with d2-d4, d7-d5 and Nb8-c6, whether or not White has first played c2-
> >c4, I'd have to say such a designation does not seem to be justified
> >by Chigorin's own games.
>
> Interesting. =A0
>
> On the other hand, I searched my Fritz database for games in which
> Nimzowitsch played Black in the position after 1 e4 Nc6, 2 d4 e5, and
> didn't find any, and yet isn't that usually called "Nimzowitsch's
> Defense" ?

A reasonable point, Mike. I'd look at that this way: The defining
moves of the Nimzovitch Defense are 1.e4 Nc6, and any game beginning
that way can be correctly called a Nimzovitch Defense, as long as it
does not soon transpose into, say, a Ruy Lopez, French, Pirc or some
such. In the five Nimzovitch games on my database that began 1.e4 Nc6
2.d4, he continued 2...d5, but 2...e5 is still a Nimzovitch Defense,
whether he played it or not.
However, a Chigorin Defense is defined by not just two moves, but by
four: 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nc6, which Chigorin played many times. He never
played 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nc6. So unless White obliges soon with c2-c4, I
don't consider it correct to call 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nc6 a Chigorin
Defense.
But this is just my opinion, and I don't want to make a big deal of
it. I like to investigate the history of openings, just as I'm
interested in other aspects of chess history, and your comments
prompted me to look into this opening.

> I doubt one will find opening nomenclature subject to any consistent
> rational scheme.

You're quite right there. As far as I know, Philidor never played
Philidor's Defense, Maroczy never played the Maroczy Bind (he played
against it), Allgaier published analysis of Alekhine's Defense 100
years before Alekhine ever played it, and no Dutch player of note was
ever partial to the Dutch Defense. Much opening nomenclature is
arbitrary, but I still prefer giving openings irrational human-related
names rather than ECO codes.

Date: 16 Apr 2008 14:57:14
From: Mike Murray
Subject: Re: Real chess ?

On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 14:30:01 -0700 (PDT), [email protected] wrote:

>Much opening nomenclature is
>arbitrary, but I still prefer giving openings irrational human-related
>names rather than ECO codes.

Ditto that. Chess history (and, sometimes, chess legend) is
incorporated in the various names for openings and variations, and is
lost in the coldness of ECO codes.

Ghulam Kassim's Attack, the Gledhill Attack, the Orangutan Opening,
the Giuoco Piano, all the relatively minor players immortalized in
obscure variations of the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit -- who'd want to give
that up for something with all the charm of spreadsheet cells?

Date: 16 Apr 2008 11:13:37
From:
Subject: Re: Real chess ?

On Apr 15, 6:05=A0pm, Mike Murray <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 14:34:00 -0700 (PDT), [email protected] wrote:
> > =A0One could characterize the Veresov that way perhaps if Black plays
> >c7-c5, but that doesn't apply in your game, since White hasn't moved
> >his c-pawn.
>
> You think the "Chigorin" name only applies if the White c-pawn has
> moved to c4? Most of the books I've read seem to apply it to the
> structure of d4/d5 pawns bumping heads combined with the Black QN
> blocking the Black QBP.

Mike, your comment prompted me to do a little research on Chigorin's
repertoire. My CB database lists 38 games where Chigorin had Black and
the game began 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 or 1.Nf3 d5 2.d4. There was not a single
one in which Chigorin replied 2...Nc6. His most common replies were
2...Nf6, 2...Bg4 and 2...e6. There were about seven instances where
played ...Nb8-c6 with his c-pawn still on c7, usually when he had
played 2...Bg4 (and never when he had played 2...e6), but these were
only in games where White first played c2-c4, and a subsequent ...Nc6
allowed a transposition to a more or less normal line of the Chigorin
Defense to the QGD.
So if some books are giving the name "Chigorin Defense" to anything
with d2-d4, d7-d5 and Nb8-c6, whether or not White has first played c2-
c4, I'd have to say such a designation does not seem to be justified
by Chigorin's own games.

BTW, Chigorin does not seem to have done too well against 1.d4 d5
2.Nf3. His score for those 38 games is +13 -22 =3D3, and includes some
embarassing quickies:

(7514) Steinitz,William - Chigorin,Mikhail [D02]
World Championship 2nd Havana (4), 26.01.1889

1.Nf3 d5 2.d4 Bg4 3.c4! Bxf3? 4.gxf3 e6 5.cxd5 Qxd5?! 6.e4 Bb4+ 7.Nc3
Qa5 8.Bd2 Nc6?! 9.d5!=B1 exd5 10.a3! Nd4 11.Bd3 0=960=960 12.axb4 Nxf3+
13.Qxf3! Qxa1+ 14.Ke2 Qxb2 15.Rb1 Qa3 16.Nb5 Qa6 17.Qxf7+- Qb6 18.Rc1
Nh6 19.Qxg7 dxe4 20.Qxc7+ Qxc7 21.Rxc7+ Kb8 22.Bxe4 1-0

(7520) Steinitz,William - Chigorin,Mikhail [D07]
World Championship 2nd Havana (10), 08.02.1889

1.Nf3 d5 2.d4 Bg4 3.c4 Nc6 4.e3 e5 5.Qb3! Bxf3 6.gxf3 exd4 7.cxd5 Ne5
8.exd4 Nd7 9.Nc3! Qe7+ 10.Be3 Qb4 11.Qc2! Ngf6 12.Bb5 Rd8 13.0=960=960 a6
14.Ba4 Be7 15.Rhg1 g6 16.Bh6! 16...b5 17.Bb3 17...Nb6 18.Rge1 Kd7
19.Bf4 Rc8 20.a3 Qa5 21.Bg5!+- Ng8 22.Bxe7 Nxe7 23.Ne4 Rb8 24.Nf6+ Kd8
25.Rxe7 Kxe7 26.Qxc7+ Nd7 27.Qxa5 1=960

(9758) Blackburne,Joseph Henry - Chigorin,Mikhail [D02]
Berlin, 1897

1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bf4 e6 4.Nbd2 c5 5.e3 Nc6 6.c3 cxd4 7.exd4 Bd6
8.Bxd6 Qxd6 9.Bb5 0=960 10.0=960 Bd7 11.Re1 Qf4 12.Bxc6 Bxc6 13.Ne5 Nd7
14.Ndf3 Rfc8 15.Nxd7 Bxd7 16.Ne5 Be8 17.Re3 Qg5 18.Qd3 Rc7 19.Rae1
Rac8 20.Rg3 Qf5 21.Qe3 Kh8 22.Qd2 h6 23.Ng4 Kh7 24.Ne3 Qe4 25.Rg4 1=960

(15861) Marshall,Frank James - Chigorin,Mikhail [D02]
Ostende (3), 1907

1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 e6 3.Bf4 Nf6 4.e3 Bd6 5.Bg3 c6 6.Bd3 Bxg3 7.hxg3 Nbd7
8.Nbd2 Qc7 9.Qe2 c5 10.c3 c4 11.Bc2 b5 12.e4 dxe4 13.Nxe4 h6 14.Nfg5
Bb7 15.0=960=960 0=960 16.f4 Rab8 17.a3 a5 18.Nd2 Bd5 19.Nge4 b4 20.axb4
axb4 21.Nxf6+ Nxf6 22.Qe5 Qa5 23.Nxc4 Qa6 24.Rxh6 bxc3 25.Rdh1 gxh6
26.Rxh6 cxb2+ 27.Kd2 Ne4+ 28.Bxe4 Bxe4 29.Qh8# 1=960

Date: 16 Apr 2008 13:16:37
From: Mike Murray
Subject: Re: Real chess ?

On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:13:37 -0700 (PDT), [email protected] wrote:

>> You think the "Chigorin" name only applies if the White c-pawn has
>> moved to c4? Most of the books I've read seem to apply it to the
>> structure of d4/d5 pawns bumping heads combined with the Black QN
>> blocking the Black QBP.

> Mike, your comment prompted me to do a little research on Chigorin's
>repertoire. My CB database lists 38 games where Chigorin had Black and
>the game began 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 or 1.Nf3 d5 2.d4. There was not a single
>one in which Chigorin replied 2...Nc6. His most common replies were
>2...Nf6, 2...Bg4 and 2...e6. There were about seven instances where
>played ...Nb8-c6 with his c-pawn still on c7, usually when he had
>played 2...Bg4 (and never when he had played 2...e6), but these were
>only in games where White first played c2-c4, and a subsequent ...Nc6
>allowed a transposition to a more or less normal line of the Chigorin
>Defense to the QGD.
> So if some books are giving the name "Chigorin Defense" to anything
>with d2-d4, d7-d5 and Nb8-c6, whether or not White has first played c2-
>c4, I'd have to say such a designation does not seem to be justified
>by Chigorin's own games.

Interesting.

On the other hand, I searched my Fritz database for games in which
Nimzowitsch played Black in the position after 1 e4 Nc6, 2 d4 e5, and
didn't find any, and yet isn't that usually called "Nimzowitsch's
Defense" ?

I doubt one will find opening nomenclature subject to any consistent
rational scheme.

Date: 15 Apr 2008 17:02:09
From:
Subject: Re: Real chess ?

On Apr 15, 6:57=A0pm, Mike Murray <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 15:30:14 -0700 (PDT), [email protected] wrote:
> >> You think the "Chigorin" name only applies if the White c-pawn has
> >> moved to c4? Most of the books I've read seem to apply it to the
> >> structure of d4/d5 pawns bumping heads combined with the Black QN
> >> blocking the Black QBP.
> > =A0As far as I know, the Chigorin Defense to the Queen's Gambit is 1.d4
> >d5 2.c4 Nc6 only. If White plays 2.Nf3 without an early c2-c4, it's
> >not a QG, and therefore not a Chigorin Defense to the QG. Concerning
> >1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nc6, the Oxford Companion notes that it sometimes is
> >called a Chigorin Defense, but adds that it is "apparently so named
> >because of its resemblance to [1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nc6] rather than evidence
> >that Chigorin played it." Searching ChessBase, I can't find any
> >instance of Chigorin as Black playing 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nc6.
>
> Morozevich refers to lines where White omits and early c4 as "Chigorin
> Motifs".

I only have Angus Dunnington's book on the Chigorin Defense, not
Morozevich's, so I can't comment on that.

> Leaving aside the question of transpositions involving a later c4, it
> seems to me the name of an opening can reflect a broader range of
> concrete variations than the originator actually played. =A0I'd submit
> that =A0"Chigorin", =A0better than "QP-game", describes what's going on,
> in terms of plans and strategy.

Mike, I would agree that "QP game" is pretty much a useless term,
other than that it indicates 1.d4 as the first move. But when it comes
to assigning someone's name to a variation, I prefer a more
restrictive, concise approach, one that represents what he actually
played, or actual analysis he published, rather than a general
thematic resemblance. But I understand, I think, where you're coming
from, and don't wish to belabor the matter unduly.

Date: 15 Apr 2008 15:30:14
From:
Subject: Re: Real chess ?

Date: 15 Apr 2008 15:57:35
From: Mike Murray
Subject: Re: Real chess ?

On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 15:30:14 -0700 (PDT), [email protected] wrote:

>> You think the "Chigorin" name only applies if the White c-pawn has
>> moved to c4? Most of the books I've read seem to apply it to the
>> structure of d4/d5 pawns bumping heads combined with the Black QN
>> blocking the Black QBP.

> As far as I know, the Chigorin Defense to the Queen's Gambit is 1.d4
>d5 2.c4 Nc6 only. If White plays 2.Nf3 without an early c2-c4, it's
>not a QG, and therefore not a Chigorin Defense to the QG. Concerning
>1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nc6, the Oxford Companion notes that it sometimes is
>called a Chigorin Defense, but adds that it is "apparently so named
>because of its resemblance to [1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nc6] rather than evidence
>that Chigorin played it." Searching ChessBase, I can't find any
>instance of Chigorin as Black playing 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nc6.

Morozevich refers to lines where White omits and early c4 as "Chigorin
Motifs".

Leaving aside the question of transpositions involving a later c4, it
seems to me the name of an opening can reflect a broader range of
concrete variations than the originator actually played. I'd submit
that "Chigorin", better than "QP-game", describes what's going on,
in terms of plans and strategy.

Date: 15 Apr 2008 14:34:00
From:
Subject: Re: Real chess ?

On Apr 15, 5:07=A0pm, Mike Murray <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 12:54:09 -0700 (PDT), [email protected] wrote:
> >> I was playing Black in a 5-minute game. =A0The game opened
> >>1 d4 Nc6, 2 Nf3 d5, 3 Bf4 Bg4, 4 e3 f6. =A0
> > =A0Actually, the way this works out, it seems to me more like a
> >reversed Veresov than a Nimzovitch or Chigorin Defense. A main line of
> >the Veresov, when played in the style of Kurt Richter, runs 1.d4 Nf6
> >2.Nc3 d5 =A03.Bg5 Bf5 4.f3, and now if Black plays 4...e6 you'd have the
> >exact reverse of the final position of your game.
>
> Heh. =A0I think I've seen the Veresov/Richter opening categorized as a
> Tschigorin Reversed (but can't give a cite right now).

One could characterize the Veresov that way perhaps if Black plays
c7-c5, but that doesn't apply in your game, since White hasn't moved
his c-pawn.

> > =A0However, I don't think that would be all that good a move in that
> >position;
>
> With the positions reversed and the extra move, 5 e4 is pretty strong.

In your game? After 1.d4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d5 3.Bf4 Bg4 4.e3 f6? That would
be dreadful for White, viz. 5.e4? dxe4 6.h3 Bh5 7.g4 exf3 8.d5 Nb4
9.gxh5 Qxd5.
Or do you mean 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 Bf5 4. f3 e6 5.e4? If so, I
agree -- Black must lose a piece after 5...Bg6 6.e5. However, with the
extra tempo White has in the reverse of your game, he can avoid this
disaster with, say, 5.Be2 or 5.Bb5.

> >book moves are 4...Bg6, c5, c6, and Nbd7. Therefore, by
> >playing 4.e3 needlessly, White may already have been conceding some of
> >his first-move advantage.
>
> I dunno -- it's given without much comment in both Morozevich's and in
> Bronznik's books.

Date: 15 Apr 2008 15:05:50
From: Mike Murray
Subject: Re: Real chess ?

On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 14:34:00 -0700 (PDT), [email protected] wrote:

> One could characterize the Veresov that way perhaps if Black plays
>c7-c5, but that doesn't apply in your game, since White hasn't moved
>his c-pawn.

You think the "Chigorin" name only applies if the White c-pawn has
moved to c4? Most of the books I've read seem to apply it to the
structure of d4/d5 pawns bumping heads combined with the Black QN
blocking the Black QBP.

>> > �However, I don't think that would be all that good a move in that
>> >position;

>> With the positions reversed and the extra move, 5 e4 is pretty strong.

> In your game? After 1.d4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d5 3.Bf4 Bg4 4.e3 f6? That would
>be dreadful for White, viz. 5.e4? dxe4 6.h3 Bh5 7.g4 exf3 8.d5 Nb4
>9.gxh5 Qxd5.

No, no, no. With White playing a "Chigorin Reversed" or Veresov, as
you describe below.

> Or do you mean 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3. Bg5 Bf5 4. f3 e6 5.e4? If so, I
>agree -- Black must lose a piece after 5...Bg6 6.e5. However, with the
>extra tempo White has in the reverse of your game, he can avoid this
>disaster with, say, 5.Be2 or 5.Bb5.

Sure. He can even get away with 5 QN-Q2, since after 5 ... e5, 6 dxe5
fxe5, 7 Bg5 saves the piece.

Date: 15 Apr 2008 12:54:09
From:
Subject: Re: Real chess ?

On Apr 15, 3:31=A0pm, Mike Murray <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 11:21:49 -0700 (PDT), "[email protected]"
>
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >On Apr 15, 11:11 am, Mike Murray <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Over on Playchess.com yesterday, I was playing Black in a 5-minute
> >> game. =A0The game opened 1 d4 Nc6, 2 Nf3 d5, 3 Bf4 Bg4, 4 e3 f6. =A0At
> >> this point, my opponent, evidently a German player with a FIDE rating
> >> of about 2240, resigned! =A0I sent him a message asking why he resigned=
.
> >> He replied, "I want to play real chess".
> >Granted perhaps that 4. ... f6 maybe was not a grandmaster level move,
> >the guy is just a rude jerk and should be ignored no matter what his
> >FIDE rating. =A0He could have been polite enough to finish the game and
> >move on, or, if he didn't want to play a lower rated player, not have
> >accepted the game in the first place....
>
> Yeah, rude opponents (the guys who curse at you when they start
> losing) aren't much of a problem -- just put 'em on the iggy list.. =A0
>
> As for lower rated, my Playchess rating when we played wasn't all that
> much lower than his (2104 vs 1998) -- and he lost a bunch of points by
> resigning on move 4. =A0Playchess lets White abort on the first or
> second move without penalty, so he could have bailed immediately if he
> thought Nimzovich's Defense was too squirrelly.

Actually, the way this works out, it seems to me more like a
reversed Veresov than a Nimzovitch or Chigorin Defense. A main line of
the Veresov, when played in the style of Kurt Richter, runs 1.d4 Nf6
2.Nc3 d5 3.Bg5 Bf5 4.f3, and now if Black plays 4...e6 you'd have the
exact reverse of the final position of your game.
However, I don't think that would be all that good a move in that
position; book moves are 4...Bg6, c5, c6, and Nbd7. Therefore, by
playing 4.e3 needlessly, White may already have been conceding some of
his first-move advantage.

> The funny thing is, there are a fair number of examples of strong
> players using 4 ... f6 in OTB tournament games. =A0A search of my Fritz
> DB brings up 4 games by a guy named Hrvoje Jurkovic, who sports a 2440
> FIDE rating. =A0 For grins, I let Rybka crank away on the position for a
> while, and it comes up with no more than White's usual tiny edge. =A0And
> the general idea of ...f6 comes up quite often in the Tschigorin. It's
> a reasonable strategy -- keep the White N out of e5, threaten ... e5,
> support a K-side pawn storm, etc., all dependent on the concrete
> situation.
>
> So.... just a wee bit puzzled.

Date: 15 Apr 2008 14:07:26
From: Mike Murray
Subject: Re: Real chess ?

On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 12:54:09 -0700 (PDT), [email protected] wrote:

>> I was playing Black in a 5-minute game. �The game opened
>>1 d4 Nc6, 2 Nf3 d5, 3 Bf4 Bg4, 4 e3 f6. �

> Actually, the way this works out, it seems to me more like a
>reversed Veresov than a Nimzovitch or Chigorin Defense. A main line of
>the Veresov, when played in the style of Kurt Richter, runs 1.d4 Nf6
>2.Nc3 d5 3.Bg5 Bf5 4.f3, and now if Black plays 4...e6 you'd have the
>exact reverse of the final position of your game.

Heh. I think I've seen the Veresov/Richter opening categorized as a
Tschigorin Reversed (but can't give a cite right now).

> However, I don't think that would be all that good a move in that
>position;

With the positions reversed and the extra move, 5 e4 is pretty strong.

>book moves are 4...Bg6, c5, c6, and Nbd7. Therefore, by
>playing 4.e3 needlessly, White may already have been conceding some of
>his first-move advantage.

I dunno -- it's given without much comment in both Morozevich's and in
Bronznik's books.

Date: 15 Apr 2008 12:31:55
From: Mike Murray
Subject: Re: Real chess ?

On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 11:21:49 -0700 (PDT), "[email protected]"
<[email protected] > wrote:

>On Apr 15, 11:11 am, Mike Murray <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Over on Playchess.com yesterday, I was playing Black in a 5-minute
>> game. The game opened 1 d4 Nc6, 2 Nf3 d5, 3 Bf4 Bg4, 4 e3 f6. At
>> this point, my opponent, evidently a German player with a FIDE rating
>> of about 2240, resigned! I sent him a message asking why he resigned.
>> He replied, "I want to play real chess".

>Granted perhaps that 4. ... f6 maybe was not a grandmaster level move,
>the guy is just a rude jerk and should be ignored no matter what his
>FIDE rating. He could have been polite enough to finish the game and
>move on, or, if he didn't want to play a lower rated player, not have
>accepted the game in the first place....

Yeah, rude opponents (the guys who curse at you when they start
losing) aren't much of a problem -- just put 'em on the iggy list..

As for lower rated, my Playchess rating when we played wasn't all that
much lower than his (2104 vs 1998) -- and he lost a bunch of points by
resigning on move 4. Playchess lets White abort on the first or
second move without penalty, so he could have bailed immediately if he
thought Nimzovich's Defense was too squirrelly.

The funny thing is, there are a fair number of examples of strong
players using 4 ... f6 in OTB tournament games. A search of my Fritz
DB brings up 4 games by a guy named Hrvoje Jurkovic, who sports a 2440
FIDE rating. For grins, I let Rybka crank away on the position for a
while, and it comes up with no more than White's usual tiny edge. And
the general idea of ...f6 comes up quite often in the Tschigorin. It's
a reasonable strategy -- keep the White N out of e5, threaten ... e5,
support a K-side pawn storm, etc., all dependent on the concrete
situation.

So.... just a wee bit puzzled.