My analyses of the Halloween are almost finished . I just have to add some diagrams. I am looking for the best site to publish it (around 50 pages). Someone can advice me ?
Win with the Halloween Gambit!!!
Sort:
Thanks pfren but these sites are not usefull in my case. It's not possible to copy/paste from Word without losing a lot of things ( pagenumbering, diagrams, ...).
@sansuk Isn't it possible to do what you wish directly on chess.com with the blog feature? Also thanks for the lines.
Yes, that is the point. OK, then I will let it publish by UON (Unorthodox Openings Newsletter) in book format, This will only takes more time.
I found a way to publish it :
https://halloweengambit.jouwweb.be/win-with-the-halloween-gambit
Have fun with it !
Thank you!
I'm a big fan of this opening, I play it whenever I have the opportunity (unless I have to work on other openings).
Colin20G wrote:
Thank you!
I'm a big fan of this opening, I play it whenever I have the opportunity (unless I have to work on other openings).
Thank you! This comment is me too: I play it whenever I have the opportunity! 
LOL imagine playing both knights forward only to get them threatened FOUR TIMES IN A ROW, and even then having to lurch them back each time!
pfren wrote:
Bms087 wrote:
LOL imagine playing both knights forward only to get them threatened FOUR TIMES IN A ROW, and even then having to lurch them back each time!
LOL imagine being offered a knight for just one pawn at move four, and the opponent just hoping to get the piece back at some time, some place.
The Muzio gambit offers a knight for no pawn at move 5 and is considered pretty respectable.
pfren wrote:
Bms087 wrote:
LOL imagine playing both knights forward only to get them threatened FOUR TIMES IN A ROW, and even then having to lurch them back each time!
LOL imagine being offered a knight for just one pawn at move four, and the opponent just hoping to get the piece back at some time, some place.
Dude, you've already said the same thing - with varying degrees of sarcasm and snark. We get it, you don't like it. We also all can see you have the little red box next to your name, so you know how to play chess. But nobody is asking you to be the gatekeeper of the Halloween Gambit. It's a fun gambit, if you don't like it okay, move along.
Don’t tell me that you’re the guy who lost in the OP’s game pfren 😝
I think as a IM pfren is/was a lot better than 2000. 2000 is still basically rubbish in terms of clinically exploiting and capitalizing on openings, sure they may make some use of opening advantage but it's nothing like the importance of openings for 2300 and up, it wouldn't be some wild thing for them to lose to a terrible opening, especially a trappy one. IM is meant to be around 2400 as a rule of thumb, so pfren must have been pretty decent.
2000 also isn't rated "far higher" than a 1800 player, the 1800 player would be expected to around 1/3rd of the time. It's the same difference as between a 1400 player and a 1600 player, it's just the psychological significance of the 2000 that makes it sound high, and the fact one of the players is slightly below 1800.
I don't just think so, I know so. According to the normal elo formula a 400 point rating difference gives about 10% success for the lower rated player. A 200 point difference should be about the square root of that - ie. a very rough ballpark of 1/3rd of the time.
In particular in any ratings system that hasn't been tampered with the difference in rating leads to the same success vs failure for each player no matter where they are on the scale. So eg. the success rate for the lower player between 1400 and 1600 players should be the same as between 2600 and 2800 players. FIDE uses this traditional elo rating system, I believe chess.com uses some more logistic distribution formula or something like that but it's the same basic idea.
Nice gambit for quick chess :)