Awwww, don't be so hard on Charlie---he did after all follow a recent strategy recommendation in your blog! I refer to your WC round-1 tiebreaks item, specifically:
---Next, the good and the interesting. In round 1.3, Shabalov resigned after 12 moves, which struck me as a pretty clever decision. Objectively, he was lost, but he could have kept going. The decision seemed to me motivated by a desire to forget the game as quickly as possible and to rest up and prep for the next game - and it worked!
This is exactly what Charlie ordered by allowing the Stanford guy to walk into the end zone untouched, to conserve 59 seconds on the clock. However jarring it was to see Knute Rockne's old team lie down, the chess move almost worked as ND got inside the 30. Head coaches refer to "the chess game" all the time. As the leading local chess authority, what do you have to say for yourself? :-)
I approved of his letting them score - that was a very good decision on his part. In fact Notre Dame played very well for most of the game, and they were in every game this year. Their offense was consistently good too, but what defense! What defense? Weis has a real future as an offensive coordinator, but at no point during the Weis tenure have we had a reliable defense.
Right, so how many times has Tigran Petrosian been the subject of your weekly show? Petrosian would fortify his King after just a whiff of an attack---think of: what could the Irish do even before the opponent got past the 50? Maybe the ND defense would have started viewing "eight-in-the-box" as a Pawn Structure... See what I mean?
OK, their D could have drawn inspiration from your coverage of Korchnoi...wait-a-sec, often Notre Dame's play looked *exactly* like choosing the Pirc Defense in a crucial matchgame... That's it!---they tried to emulate Viktor the Terrible...who had a knack for losing 4 games in a row even in winning efforts...
Reader Comments (3)
Awwww, don't be so hard on Charlie---he did after all follow a recent strategy recommendation in your blog! I refer to your WC round-1 tiebreaks item, specifically:
---Next, the good and the interesting. In round 1.3, Shabalov resigned after 12 moves, which struck me as a pretty clever decision. Objectively, he was lost, but he could have kept going. The decision seemed to me motivated by a desire to forget the game as quickly as possible and to rest up and prep for the next game - and it worked!
This is exactly what Charlie ordered by allowing the Stanford guy to walk into the end zone untouched, to conserve 59 seconds on the clock. However jarring it was to see Knute Rockne's old team lie down, the chess move almost worked as ND got inside the 30. Head coaches refer to "the chess game" all the time. As the leading local chess authority, what do you have to say for yourself? :-)
I approved of his letting them score - that was a very good decision on his part. In fact Notre Dame played very well for most of the game, and they were in every game this year. Their offense was consistently good too, but what defense! What defense? Weis has a real future as an offensive coordinator, but at no point during the Weis tenure have we had a reliable defense.
[What defense?]
Right, so how many times has Tigran Petrosian been the subject of your weekly show? Petrosian would fortify his King after just a whiff of an attack---think of: what could the Irish do even before the opponent got past the 50? Maybe the ND defense would have started viewing "eight-in-the-box" as a Pawn Structure... See what I mean?
OK, their D could have drawn inspiration from your coverage of Korchnoi...wait-a-sec, often Notre Dame's play looked *exactly* like choosing the Pirc Defense in a crucial matchgame... That's it!---they tried to emulate Viktor the Terrible...who had a knack for losing 4 games in a row even in winning efforts...