Owen's Defense + Ruy Lopez (Morphy Defense) | The Sensei Speedrun | GM Naroditsky

[@AC-sk7uv]

Danya, rather than taking this as a sign to not play openings you’re unfamiliar with, I think it’s quite instructive to see how you handle “messing up” an opening and then try to improve throughout the middle game. Love the content.

[@jesperlarsson1362]

I'd like to see this aswell, good suggestion

[@walterrldias]

I totally agree

[@DaddyOho]

@@LorenzVandeVenne I understand what you mean, and I agree, but I think OP is asking Danya to maybe go into openings he's unfamiliar with - not the best move - to then play the opening out thereafter. For demonstration purposes, it could be useful to see how to defuse early pressure from opening inaccuracies.

[@misterunknown8923]

It's also good for him to learn even more

[@oliverjackson3761]

@@LorenzVandeVenne of course, but no one in these videos’ target audience is really expected to play computer moves. daniel shows how he looks for the best moves, but recovering from a losing position after you make bad moves is a necessary skill for winning games.

[@stephenwells1559]

The thing is about the Lopez for 1700+ players is that it will likely be the ONLY opening they’ve studied, but they will have played almost every line within it multiple times. They will know it inside out and back to front 10-15 moves deep. So he actually had the theory advantage here and it’s not unusual for him to punish small mistakes. He’s likely had that position where Daniel played Bb4 a dozen times before. But once Daniel was into the middle game, GM experience showed through

[@Nick2014B]

I'm 1600 and only played d4 c4 99% of the time I don't like how much black and dictate the game in the ruy

[@elfacun550]

I would say that suspicious amount of deepness knowledge of the line, but it is entirely possible that he investigated the line prior to the game and got lucky. Definitely not the norm.

[@mikecantreed]

Lol what? 2300s don’t even know this much about the ruy Lopez. 1700s don’t know shit about theory.

[@cfreddy24]

Yeah having been in the 1600-1800 range, and having periods of playing both the Spanish as white and the Marshall as black, it’s probably the longest line of theory that a large group of people in that range know. Probably because it’s generally fitting compared to other popular openings played at that level that have a lot of branching off limits along the way. And You really have to know it to cross into 1700-1800 playing the Spanish as White because the black Marshall players will crush you if you don’t. So you get crushed then you learn it. Daniel doesn’t play a large volume of 1700 games so of course his instincts tell him something is off, but this is super normal for this range.

[@frederik_9748]

​@@cfreddy24I play the spanish as white and the marshall with black as well in the 1800-2000 range. And i have to fully agree with you. In my experience the marshall is played often and the theory is well known. With black i have been suprised by white's marshall knowledge a few times similar to the video. The thing is that me and my opponents don't actually know any of the sidelines. We just know a few common main lines that go to move 10-15.

[@ThePenguinTutorials]

I would like to echo other commenters who have already made this point. I personally don’t watch your videos just to see you crush all of your opponents. I watch your videos because you are such a talented teacher no matter the quality of opponent you face. The fact that you sometimes end up in losing positions by playing lines you don’t know perfectly is actually a positive thing in my opinion. Being able to see you make decisions in difficult situations is actually MORE educational than had you never made those mistakes in the first place. So in summary, please don’t apologize for ending up in a losing position during the second game. It was highly educational and I think seeing you in these situations makes your series better not worse.

[@WhosBeau]

You are solely responsible for the last 150 elo I've gained Danya! Best chess content on KZbin!

[@torresoso]

These videos single handedly brought me from 900 to 1400 lol

[@jdklein033]

@Yogi Morphy the “last” 160 inferring they gained 150 more from their prior elo

[@jdklein033]

@Yogi Morphy were you trying to make a joke?

[@ltroy_sw]

@@jdklein033 he did a nice joke.

[@stravinskyfan]

​@@ltroy_swthat's quite sad of you to think so

[@RandomDPAP]

This is a speedrun, yes, but this is also the Sensei speedrun! Trying out openings that you don't know about is IMO really convincing for new players to try openings and play them even if they don't know all the theories. The important part is to learn from that game through analyzing your mistakes and that will create knowledge that I like to call natural opening theory since you learned it by playing and analyzing and not because you read and memorized 15-20 moves deep into the opening theory. I hope what I am saying made sense lol.

[@acidreflex25]

Man, I'm always blown away by how deep Daniel's knowledge of the game is. Like, he doesn't really play the Owen's Defense, and I doubt he runs into it a whole lot in OTB tournaments, yet he still has a bunch of key lines committed to memory just in case. You could probably open with something crazy like the Ware opening or the Lemming Defense and he'd be like, "Oh yeah, here you made x move, but the optimal line is..."

[@katarinajones4306]

You’d be surprised how much opening theory people know at that level especially with Chessable and opening databases

[@gelatinousjoe7979]

Especially the chessable courses, they turn 1800+ suddenly into gms in the opening

[@Truthseeker11158]

Yeah sure lol

[@zafhalasdfn3324]

This person was a confirmed cheater later on, not to mention how extremely obvious it was. None of you people know what you're talking about÷

[@mrflamingbear1794]

I honestly don't think Reg9999 did any cheating during your game. Jan Gustafason's (excellent and entertaining) e5 Short & Sweet chessable course gives easily digestible theory on the Marshall that I could grasp at a 1400 elo when I picked it up. Reg9999's play honestly came across as someone who wants to improve and has really put the effort into theory. Obviously I would still defer to your opinion on the matter, just thought I'd give insight as a 1500 rated player who wasn't lost at all while watching Reg's play in the Marshall (only because I consumed that specific part of Jan's course during an intense 3 day ice storm 😂).

[@waltersundberg4047]

I have that course as well. Gustafsson recommends Ra7 after Be3 and it's worked well for me in the two games I've used it.

[@discosugar]

Danya: I am not an oracle also Danya: *plays king g7* rook d8: am I a joke to you??

[@pabl048]

I play Owen's very regularly and it's cool to see it show up several times in this speedrun. Thank you for everything you do good sir!

[@baetz2]

Some time ago, I was destroyed multiple times by Owen's and Nimzo-Larsen vs 1700 player who plays only that openings. Now Danya says it's dubious and punishes it so easily. I think I should borrow this Bd3 Ne2 setup.

[@Samuftie]

Owen is so annoying

[@binnieb173]

that second game seemed legit. Even I (a 1300) have had games that just are right into my prep and I play with like a 98% accuracy... then I get out of the prep, blunder and loose. lol

[@pure2291]

well that guys account is now banned and he had a 600 bullet rating. considering the default blitz rating 1200, he would have had to lose consecutive games against

[@dunno5578]

@@pure2291 No, he isn't banned. Don't spread misinformation. The guy only played 4 bullet games but has 3500+ rapid games and is actually around 1800 now. . Obviously bullet just isn't his cup of tea. I'm pretty bad at chess but even I know specific lines up to about move 15.

[@andromeda8425]

Love the speedruns, I think it's an absolutely stunning material for any intermediate player, and I wanted to chime in about the cheating accusations. I am about 1750 Rapid at lichess as an "adult improver", although I haven't played for awhile, but I love studying openings so that I could later check where have I forgot the theory. I prepared many quite deep lines against any e4 or d4 spending countless of hours writing them down from the books and YT videos. Ruy Lopez is my main opening for white, and although I play the anti-Marshall with 6.d3 and 8.a3 (Karjakin used that line against Carlsen in 2016 WCC match multiple times), knowing the first 10-12 moves against the Marshall attack is not that difficult. As Daniel said, the theory goes way beyond that, and in many cases of Marshall there is "the only move" or only a few moves, that does not screw the game up. It's understandable, that it looks suspicious, since few players at 1700 and even above that study the opening theory, but once in a while, there will be a weak 1700 who knows his theory. It's awesome, that Daniel gives the benefit of the doubt to his opponents. It would really make me puke and contemplate quitting chess altogether if I was accused of cheating by my favorite chess teacher only because I know some opening theory.

[@Nnm26]

I would have the opposite reaction lol. I would be extremely happy if some grandmaster thought my moves were at engine level. I would probably ride that high for days to come.

[@TomJones-tx7pb]

I had studied this line of the Marshall to beyond this level at the age of 12 many decades ago, before computers. The time the player spent on his moves, and the moves he came up with indicate a human without an engine. When I was 17 I played a slow game against John Nunn with me as white in the Marshall. He had just got back from an international tournament where he had beaten a GM by playing the Marshall as black. After my game he remarked that it was ridiculous that I had played better than the GM, which I took as quite a compliment.

[@connormonday]

Yeah they only played a few moves past the tabiya

[@aiGeis]

It would make you puke and consider quitting chess because your idol accused you of cheating? And you're an adult? Give your head a shake.

[@gardeningtipsyoutubechannel]

Thank you, I drink your sacred chess nectar, master.

[@zeinfeimrelduulthaarn7028]

Wtf 😂😂

[@GenSignups]

Giggidy

[@brooksrussell5695]

Between Danya and Agadmator, one could learn all they need to know to play chess well. Thank you again Danya! Very clear and in depth instruction.

[@daviddelille1443]

Danya shouldn't feel bad about having voiced his suspicions when he did: his opponent basically played perfectly up to that point because he knew the theory. He also stated exactly what he thought and why. He had incomplete information and made the correct decision in that situation. Further information changed the matter but that doesn't make his previous decision bad.

[@timcannon5384]

I havent finished the video yet, im at 13:42, but im 1737 (often getting as low as 1550 on bad runs) and i know theory like this. Some people just like theory. When people accuse me of cheating in the chesscom chat while the game is going I sometimes just tell them to look at my games in the line we are playing. Sort of an interesting tool. I crush people in a vienna sideline called the mietner-mieses gambit all the time (me as black), i know all the ideas very deep into the position even after the theory runs out, but my account reflects that knowledge, i have a ton of games there because its a pet line for me. I also know several ruy lopez lines as deep as the opponent in this game. I assume if they arent cheating they just have a lot of games in this line which is publicly visible. Great video as always Danya

[@alexwiththeglasses]

Wow - what a contrast in games! The sad truth of the first game where players with solid ratings choose an opening they don’t seem to know, and the second where the player knew a very common line. I gather this willful ignorance of a chosen opening is so common, even at this rating, that some in the live chat were rather suspicious.🤯 And GM Danya’s remarks about seeing when it’s safe and good to move the sacred guarding pawns forward… pure gold. As I organize how and what I’m going to learn (old beginner here) these videos are invaluable and thought-provoking. I’m so grateful to have them!🙏❤️

[@scheimong]

I think the second opponent is legit - at minimum certainly not using an engine. Re8+ is a very reasonable human move to make and is consistent with the style they demonstrated. The idea of leaving the rook hanging on d8 and simply moving the king is almost unthinkable for a human, especially when calculating from a distance and for this rating range; but it's also the kind of response that a computer would never miss.

[@deadvirgin428]

Not every cheater cheats on every move, those are too easy to catch, some just cheat the opening and then play legit once they get an advantage, I think it's sus the way opponent played so many advanced ideas THAT fast. I think he's most likely legit of course, but I wouldn't defend him just because he made a mistake.

[@scheimong]

@@deadvirgin428 It's certainly plausible that the guy had some sort of opening book at their hand (which is a rather unusual way to cheat these days but nonetheless), but at this point we're just purely speculating. They could have simply spent a lot of time studying this opening and there's no way for us to know. Innocent until proven guilty.

[@torvergogna1910]

@@deadvirgin428 The ideas they played were not that advanced, also the Marshall is such a famous opening that I myself knew theory up until Bg4 and never played it. I play in that rating range more or less and the quality of play is consistent with what I experience every day.

[@tristanbass-krueger7195]

Agreed, if you play a mainline against my main white e4 opening, I'll know it pretty deep. The bishop maneuver was impressive though. (Bd1 followed by repositioning on f3)

[@obscurelines]

I think he let stockfish pay a book opening, thought he was ahead and so took over himself. And then lost.

[@thatguy5233]

16:54 bro, if i saw my opponent just moving his king in this position i'd laugh, and then i'd like to congratulate him. if i was the opponent i'd be SUS

[@lightman9935]

I mean... the move does make sense here, compared to when a cheater using an engine moves his king. You dont really care that your rook is hanging because there is a forced mate being threatened.

[@thatguy5233]

​@@lightman9935 it's all easy and clear once you saw the move:P for me, it was one of the nicest moves i've seen in a while.

[@LingtonTV]

Was extremely hard for me to see the mate threats so yes that was a crazy move

[@lightman9935]

@@thatguy5233 Its not like I saw the mate instantly, but if you were playing the game and too the time to calculate 3-4 moves ahead you would see that you have something, at least if you are 1700+ like the opponent, if you are not then its understandable not being confident in seeing something like this.

[@jeffmoreau5766]

@@lightman9935 they are not yet ready to calculate 3-4 moves ahead obviously (not the 1700's)

[@troyrowe8943]

I learn a lot more from the videos where you don't know the opening theory that well. It's super instructive to see how you approach a position where you're slightly worse out of the opening.

[@Aetherius88]

The difference between a GM and a 1700 isn't always obvious in the first 20 moves of a random game. Differences include: consistency, knowledge of thousands of lines of theory rather than dozens of lines of theory, adapting and converting advantages into wins, and most definitely accuracy in the end game. You can be +5 for 60 moves and then make 1 slight error and be completely losing. That one slight error can sometimes be the difference between a high level club player like a 1900 and a master level 2300+ and a GM will consistently play high accuracy in complicated positions.

[@geraltrivia6287]

I love these gm videos it definitely changed my elo for the better

[@jackson32]

It really helps to have a lot of practice employing the ideas, that gives you a lot of confidence later on when you actually know how to employ thee ideas in a game.

[@kroeterichNo1]

Omg how did I never think of Ne2? I love it, until now I always tried to come up with something imaginative. Very nice.

[@jonnozomboid2649]

Haha! Love this episode. Such honest and open brevity from Danya, whose instruction has helped me immensely.

[@owenallenaz]

Its amazing how a dubious setup just becomes outright obliteration in the hands of a skilled player. Its like you guys are playing a different game, and yet we all have the same pieces. Amazing.

[@MyDarkMuffin]

I'm 1800 on Lichess Rapid and there's also a few lines in some openings that I know quite deep, if someone is unfortunate enough to go with me there I will get an advantage. Definitely very possible that you fell into the one of few lines that your opponents knows really well.

[@bloodcake1337]

1800 Lichess Rapid = 1400 Lichess Blitz = 1100 Chessdotcom Blitz = 1300 Chessdotcom Rapid so you are comparing yourself with some who would be much better than you

[@MyDarkMuffin]

@@bloodcake1337 my blitz is 1788 though so I'm not sure what you're on about

[@bloodcake1337]

@@MyDarkMuffin then you are either really good at flagging people or really bad at thinking for longer then 1min because this doesnt add up so I think you are bullshitting, post your username

[@bloodcake1337]

@@MyDarkMuffin nvm i found your account and obv u dont play blitz since u have 34 games so thats why its so high but I think u knew that, it will obv adjust after you played a couple hundred games

[@MyDarkMuffin]

@@bloodcake1337 uh okay sure buddy

[@DRld-bm8nq]

Danya is now officially my favourite GM

[@topnotch3232]

Decided to eat like a slob today, and my door dash arrived the moment I got the notification, however it seems danya is the only one with hot delivery tonight.

[@tonysteele2735]

I don't really think it's arrogant when a GM says 1700s shouldn't beat me. You could probably easily use something like statistical analysis of both players games to for lack of a better term "prove" that it is highly unlikely to occur without computer aide.

[@brunocunha9337]

7:21 Danya - "Easy... all this is very simple" Me: Thought this line would just hang the bishop. I would never go for it hahaha

[@smrtfasizmu6161]

In 15+10 or slower games you have to consider all the captures. In faster time controls (5+0, 3+2 etc.) you have to consider sacrifices when the opponents king is on the ropes.

[@smrtfasizmu6161]

Same goes for the other way around, if your king is on the ropes you have to consider sacrifices by your opponent. With experience you will even be able to see patterns where the opponent can sacrifice for a perpetual check and you will be able to stop a lot of them as well if you are in a winning position and don't want a draw.

[@smrtfasizmu6161]

In either case you need to force yourself to consider such moves, both for yourself and for your opponent.

[@smrtfasizmu6161]

@@softan I guess it is because you don't have an attacking style

[@samarpan9382]

Thank you sensei!!! I hope you are doing well. Wish you an alround healthy and happy life.

[@jvillzy]

WE LOVE YOU DANYA

[@rhyssdeacon1845]

God damn I will be using that setup for e4 b6 I normally always struggle against those openings because my centre seems to always crumble but the way you steamrolled that guy was truly beautiful

[@rahulvignesh2775]

Loved this set-up against Owen's defense. I'm thinking of trying a similar set-up against the modern defense. Thank you Danya for these amazing instructive games.

[@chriskurtz3274]

im torn on the second game. there are so many player games in the lichess database so it's possible to know the theory but it's possible the opponent had the database up in another tab. when i was playing 3-5 games a day i used to report people i expected were doing this.

[@tiagohello]

That king move... amazing! Thank you very much! 💛

[@Tinil0]

For anyone curious about the "I rarely lose to anyone who isn't 2200+", that definitely isn't arrogance, that's just how ELO works. Danya has ~2600 ELO, meaning against a ~1700 player he has a roughly 97% chance to win statistically. And that's true for ANYONE who is 600 ELO ahead of their opponent more or less. Obviously quality of play can differ and that's only true if both people are playing to their ELO, but still. A lot of people underestimate how much a difference in ELO actually means. A 2200 playing Danya would have about a 9% chance to win, so definitely in the range of seeing it now and then (Especially since Danya isn't playing to his full OTB strength in any of these games).

[@tlhjr948]

Thank you for your honesty! It’s not arrogance to know your strengths and weaknesses.

[@coopernik]

I play Owen’s defense as black. And this video showed how easy black can go wrong. I will have a look at that setup so as not to end up like your opponent. Thank you🥰

[@brendonhall602]

I'm only 1350 and have the lifetime repertoires gajewski's e4 which is ruy lopez based and e4 e5 by jan gustafsson, i would consider myself extremely booked up so to speak for my level. I use aimchess to track my progress and regularly have opening ratings of 96 percent accuracy or higher. Where you see my level come out is as soon as im out of book my play drops off rapidly. So i qould say with resources like chessable it is very hard to tell if someone is cheating just because of good opening theory.

[@lightman9935]

You shouldn't focus this much on theory as a 1350, I myself am 1600 rapid and only know 2-3 openings max up to like.. 5 moves into theory, even if the opponent knows more theory than you it doesnt mean he will get a definitive advantage like a GM would. I know people at my chess club that are better than me and the only advice I hear from them is to improve my tactics rather than openings, you and I have still much to learn before starting to really study openings.

[@adamjskater]

​@@lightman9935 Seconding this. I'm almost 2100 rapid on lichess and my opening knowledge is very shallow

[@brendonhall602]

@@lightman9935 while i would say in most circumstances you would be correct, one very important aspect of chess that many people seem to get is personal enjoyment. I am not trying to reach any particular rating i have no desire to ever play on tournaments or even clubs frequently. I just study chess for personal pleasure, and i myself find opening theory particularly for the ruy lopez, and engame theory the most enjoyable to do in my free time. I personal dont enjoy studying tactics, every now and then the fancy takes me but i have no aims for long term improvement i mainly do chess related things for fun. Therefore while i think your advice would pertain to those who have goals of overall improvement would benefit from your advice, i have different goals. Obviously no one is against gaining raiting, but studying things i dont find as interesting makes me not desire to play the game so i instead of forcing aspects of study i dont like i just do what i enjoy.

[@n8han1]

An in depth video on these pins in the opening would be incredibly helpful!

[@philipmaher2198]

Merry Christmas Daniel Naroditsky 🎄

[@DrShamjam]

Can't wait for more endgame videos

[@bearsard_5101]

As a Ruy Lopez player myself, I can garantee you that it is not quite uncommon to know at least a setup (and the ideas) against the Marshall, otherwise white just gets stomped by the attack. Typically, you decide to play the Ruy Lopez, you lose in 20 moves or so in the Marshall, and you decide to learn theory (to some extent) to counter this.

[@cpf2566]

Yeah he's a Ruy Lopez player who allows the Marshall (ie: doesn't play an anti-Marshall) so it's basically a prerequisite that he knows the theory. Even people who don't play the Ruy know 10 or 12 moves lol. I don't find it suspicious at all. I think Daniel was just frustrated at making a mistake, which I can understand. It must be tiring for high rated players to constantly be suspicious of cheaters and none of us are perfect. However I do think it's a good example of why his "no accusation" policy is justified. Had he restricted himself to "I'm impressed my opponent knows the theory" I don't think there would be any conversation about cheating in the comments. Everyone would be congratulating the opponent on a well played game.

[@benedekistvan2655]

I think the opponent wasn't cheating in the 2nd game.If you play the Spanish with white,the first thing you have to know is the Marshall,I've got mated dozens of times so I had to learn the theory pretty early,probably around the 1600-1700 level.

[@self-righteousideologue9398]

Check out this guy, bragging about getting mated dozens of times. Some of us haven't met the right person yet... 🙄

[@joshuahunter2825]

Learn so much with this guy.

[@KancerKowboy]

Thats a pretty famous opening, I wouldn't be surprised at all if he knew that much theory and even figured some of it out if he had forgotten it

[@joeb7495]

17:40 " I don't know what to make of this" it's simple. He got to 1700 via memorization. Eventually got out of theory and started missing basic tactics. Nothing more to it.

[@joeb7495]

@@softan Doubt it. Is just main line moves. And he plays the marshall gambit as black if you check out his account. Just so happened to play an opening which he is super familiar with from the other side.

[@danjeory3659]

It just goes to show: even a GM can forget a line and even at 1700 level that can be very risky!! 1700s are good.

[@hypnoticlizard9693]

a 1700 can outplay a GM if all they play is one opening and learn the theory and ideas over the course of the game, when the GM is unfamiliar with the opening.

[@WiiNunchuck]

Literally anyone can go to the hanging pawns channel and watch the theory videos, I don’t know why people think this is very impressive.

[@liljackypaper]

Exactly my thoughts. It's absolutely plausible to fall behind as black against a 1700 if you make a couple inaccurate moves. I've seen Hikaru play a game against Daniel in a Vienna line that I'm really booked up in and I would have instantly had a significant advantage against Hikaru because I knew the theory and recognized as soon as Hikaru made a mistake. Obviously not saying I would have been able to convert the advantage to a win and I'm sure if it was me playing people in chat would have instantly said I was cheating.

[@DarthVader-wk9sd]

@@hypnoticlizard9693 That makes no sense but ok

[@robdubent]

@@liljackypaper ok

[@12jswilson]

Don't premove Qxh6 in case they expect you to do that and play Qxd3 and can block with the queen. White should still be winning, but it's a lot harder. This is for the newer players and not Danya. I'd play Qxd3 hoping for the premove if I was black

[@sk1mperman]

this is a good point

[@frostypotatos180]

thats a good point but after Qxf8+ Qg8 and Qxg8# the game is still over

[@sisiaaiaisisiaiqiqq7399]

Still mate dude, u dont get to be better than a gm sadly. Expert coach

[@JoseLopez-me2re]

Hello Sensei! You keep saying "Type 1 undefended piece", "Type 2 undefended piece" etc. What do these things mean? What is a Type 1/2/3 undefended piece? Thank you!!

[@PJBoyYT]

Type 1 is undefended entirely, type 2 is defended by a single piece, and "defended" = defended by a pawn or two pieces

[@corypetrey3619]

I play the King’s Indian Attack against the Owen defense, because it does transpose to a lot of French positions. I don’t know if it’s theory or how sound it is, but it works for me. I struggled against both the French and Owen until I started playing it.

[@alexf0101]

it's the chessable effect, playing a gm opening and then blunder immediately

[@thechosenone2163]

Proof is needed to ascertain if a player is truly cheating anywhere above 1500 because nowadays people consume tons of theory and know main ideas in the popular openings.

[@AFastidiousCuber]

Although it's worth acknowledging that some players do cheat by using an opening database, then play normally once they get out of theory. I'm not saying that's what this person was doing, but it is a really difficult kind of cheating to detect.

[@Liwet.]

After black's Be4 in the opening, white played Ke2 but would this be notated that way since the other knight is pinned or would it be notated K1e2 (or Kge2)?

[@cpf2566]

It's actually "N" for a knight, not "K." "K" is for the king. I don't _think_ it would technically be necessary to add the expanded notation since there is one legal Ne2 move...however I would probably add it anyway for clarity. I don't think there's a hard and fast rule for this kind of thing. I know more than one player who notates every move in the expanded notation (so "1.e2-e4" for the opening move) in tournaments and that's perfectly acceptable. Old books used to do it that way. I believe it's just convention. However if you do use the expanded notation it should be "Nge2" not "N1e2." You should use the letters of the files primarily (rather than the numbers of the ranks). The numbers are only required when both pieces are on the same file. So if there were knights on g1 and g3 and you moved one of them to e2 then the notation would be "N1e2" or "N3e2."

[@selectnull4459]

"whats our move?.... yes, its a check" - The real scientist never thinks that something must be obvious to everyone :)

[@mightymeatman2390]

Awww yeah new upload lesgo

[@amramin8604]

Can someone refer me to a video where Danya explains tactics like he did in the video at 18:30

[@sluukkonen]

For the first (and probably the last) time, I remembered a move (Bg4) that Danya didn’t.

[@selectnull4459]

"Happy that i played a human today" - LOL! :)

[@gushogg-blake]

3:57 don't premove it in case Qxd3

[@TigerChess2]

What happened to Endgame series?

[@psionl0]

If you want to sound less arrogant when discussing your ability you could just refer to the ELO ratings. Yours is at least 800 higher than your opponent meaning that for every game you draw, you win 50 and for every game you lose, you win 100.

[@bradharper641]

Hey Danya when will the next endgame video be uploaded?

[@jamesmorgan8270]

Great videos Danya, thanks to your help i managed to reach 2000 today at Blitz. Any chance you could make a video for black against the Bayonet attack in the Caro-Kahn please? I keep coming unstuck against it.

[@Not-You-Tuber]

Your videos helps a lot sir.. It improves our thinking pattern during game.. Thanks..♥️♥️♥️

[@alexglase765]

Embarrassed about forgetting a single bishop square 15 moves into theory. We didn’t know the move either so I think you’re good.

[@boyy6646]

incerdible!!! great content daniel

[@RobFlaxMusic]

Whoa, that line in the Owens where after …Bf8 white plays Nb1! In the unlikely event that I ever face this I feel weirdly prepared

[@Daniele.Rossini]

Danya can you recommend a system against the ruy lopez which is more solid and more importantly *has less theory* to learn instead of the Marshall, wich looks very complicated and risky for black? Maybe in a future speed run game? 🙃

[@self-righteousideologue9398]

I never play e5, so I never have to play against Ruy Lopez. :) Try doing Caro Kann, French, or Sicilian

[@legendkiller7625]

Hey when is the endgame series returning

[@Hilelsagi]

I also play the Marshall vs this rating range and a lot of people knows the theory here

[@walterbrownstone8017]

What do you do in a tournament when your opponent plays something that is not your opening?

[@sethmanning6813]

"Very dubious setup, and our opponent got punished. Any questions?" Another great video

[@Socrates...]

Thank you

[@Speedster___]

Can you do something with neighboring pawn tension

[@fejfo6559]

Is it possible to tell the difference between a player who likes studying openings and one using an opening book?

[@officialEricBG]

What's the idea behind a4?

[@BRDGS]

I feel like you should call 'second order forks' 'dessert forks' instead :)

[@Tshiknn]

hell yeah

[@zackf3688]

Good example of a random HS varsity team vs a random NBA team I don't know what the Vegas oddsmakers would give but I would imagine the starting odds would be very high, 100-1 at least.

[@kevinalexis5648]

What if the Qxf6 instead of g5xBh4?

[@NoahHoi]

Hi Danya, whens the nect endgame video coming?

[@jhadesdev9576]

What could have happened is that the second player was using an opening library, and then when run out of book started playing on their own. But then again, the moves were nearly instant, so it still seems unlikely. Most probably he was legit.

[@watchtower2014]

I think you would expect nearly instant moves if he was using an opening library. While Danya is thinking about next move, opponent would be checking library for common next moves from opponent and best response.

[@Tyler-ni1om]

22:20 Danya I think you underestimate the skill gap between “okay” nba players and the best HS varsity team in the US lol. The nba team would simply wipe the floor with even the most elite HS squad.

[@GStarGoku3]

The nba team would win 1000 out of 1000 games! So that's the point of the analogy. A strong gm can win 100 simultaneous games against players at this rating.

[@E8oL4]

Nice!!

[@wahyuhidayatulloh3511]

I'm 2000 and on the way to 2100.Thanks to you sir

[@alanESV2]

Marshall played Bb7? I was under the impression those old games had Nf6 in that position

[@chasefouse684]

Is it bad mannered to either not resign when there's an unstoppable mate, or is it bad mannered to resign and not let them get their checkmate?

[@piotrdominek9613]

Both are fine. But it's bad mannered to let your time run out while facing an unstoppable mate.

[@tookaysevon]

Wow, 30 moves of theory!

[@steinanderson]

they had an opening book for sure game 2

[@JM_-ix7yh]

some people do have their openings down massively through daily chessable training, but then suffer when dragged into an unpredictable middle game (even if it is winning)

[@cyin974]

It will be funny if the opponent simply knew the variation because they watched Daniel's speedruns before and had seen him playing the morphy defense, inspiring them to learn more about the opening.

[@AoyosHolY]

I think some openings are so sexy that you could maybe give 1700+ the benefit of the doubt deep into them, openings such as the Ruy Lopez, the Marshall attack and the najdorf

[@bryanp5843]

I am less than 100 elo points away from this Rui Lopez match and this game just blows me away

[@FerrisMcLaren]

The LeBron of chess

[@mouwersor]

Second dude was maybe just smurfing, or actively looking up opening theory with an engine to get an advantage early on or something. There are more 'types of cheating' than just plugging every single move in an engine, or using some program or whatever

[@waltersundberg4047]

Doubt that, Naroditsky played Bf5 which is basically never played, and the opponent just made a bunch of typical marshall moves until he got too excited

[@mouwersor]

@@waltersundberg4047 Yeah you may be right, still weird for a 1700 to know that much theory. But then again, some people can very autistically learn those kinds of things while neglecting other skills.

[@SuperYtc1]

"All of this is very simple." Said the super GM, who has been spending his life playing chess since he was barely out of the womb. 😂

[@calebwhales]

Getting used to what time you post, I love expecting a nice new video for lunch.

[@zapface94]

Please play stuff you don't know! The thinking processes in an unfamiliar situation are the most valuable.