Ultramodernist theory says play 1.e5!
.jpg)
I just ran a story about Lionel Davis and his ‘ultramodernist theory.’ Read it and make out of it what you want, but he is promoting a form of chess that breaks the mold. In reference to black moving first, here is what he has to say…
We now move to challenge this ideology that “white has the advantage of the first move” therefore we as African people strip our Caucasian counterparts of the luxury of moving first and force them to play real chess on a level board! One can even go so far as to say Black is more equal than previously held opinion might have suggested using past chess ideology!
As I stated in the article, nothing changes the theoretical premise that the “first mover” has the perceived advantage… even if black moves first. However, the more important question is whether the first move actually constitutes a distinct advantage. The statistics are at about 55% in the first mover’s favor, but my argument is that we have not exhausted the possibilities of second mover’s play and perhaps we are approaching chess with an ingrained bias.
Lionel appears to be arguing that there are some racial undertones in granting white the first move. We have perhaps heard this before. I have heard Dr. Frances Cress-Welsing use chess as a metaphor for racial conflict. We have often seen books where all problem solutions are “white to play and mate.” The board orientation in practically all chess literature is from the vantage point of playing white. In chess, we have been conditioned to believe that it is a failure not to win with white and black is doing well to draw. Is there something deeper than the color confrontation depicted in these arguments? Let’s look at this from a scientific view.
If it is said that white “first mover advantage,” then all the theory on martial science and warfare is debunked. In martial science and warfare, one does not say that the person who throws the first blow or fires the first shot has the advantage. Having the advantage depends on many factors… terrain, strength of respective armies, access to resources, preparation, strategy, etc. In fact, moving first could be a disadvantage. Who moves first is not as important to me as much as whether the player moving second has adequate countermeasures. That is what makes chess so intriguing.
Even during the “Cold War” there was something called “Mutual Assured Destruction” which kept the country firing the first nuclear missile to be fearful of an equally deadly countermeasure. That kept either the Soviet Union or the USA from taking the first move because there is no perceived advantage in it. When people say that white’s first move has an inherent advantage and present the statistics (white wins 55% of the time), maybe there are other underlying reasons for this. Otherwise, we are saying chess is an unfair game. We have also heard that “with best play” between players of equal strength, chess should be a draw. If that is so, what happened to the advantage?
My point is that it shouldn’t matter who moves first. Theoretically, chess should be able to prove that it is consistent with other universal laws of duality. Maybe chess is a lot deeper (metaphysically) than we are seeing it.
I believe that it does not really matter who moves first, the theory should be the same either way, the point is that in chess the colours of the chess pieces can be any colour so a standard needs to be set on which colour to move first so there is no confusion between parties. So i believe it is simply arbiturary just like Quantities in science for example the meter, time and weight are all arbiturary. So the paranoia of race shoud not be brought into this aspect of chess, If you want black to play first let it be but some one must and theoretically it would not matter.
I am a former student of Lionel Davis, and I am pleased to see this issue being raised. With his suggestion that black moves first he is challenging a way of thinking that has pervaded western chess theory throughout it’s history. Not by bringing question to the color of the paint on the pieces but by asking why, after the initial position on the board when both sides are equal, black should be at a disadvantage because white (as Davis puts it) “has created half of the first move?”
The notion that white is better from the beginning influences players of the black pieces to think defensively without fulling taking into account the resources available in their positions. They are relegated to defenses rather than attacks, and they seek to equalize rather than gain the advantage.
Why is it that black is playing the King’s Indian Defense when white is playing the King’s Indian Attack with the same formation and piece arrangment?
“Why must black equalize,” Davis asks, “when the position was equal to begin with?” I believe he is asserting that the position is indeed equal until one side has errored. Thus black can play as boldly in the opening as white does. Hence, the UltraPirc system where black strikes at white’s strong e-pawn with 2…f5. Why not? White is afforded such luxuries all the time in the opening.
If players of the black pieces believe in the equality of black then we could begin to see a a total shift in our overall approach and philosophy of the game. Our present theory could be all wrong and a new theory will emerge where superiority is not pre-determined by biased uncontrollable factors (such as white moving first in every game) but by the actual situation that is evoked over the chess board.
As one of the proud students of Ultramodern chess I cannot wait to see what our contribution to the game will be over time.
Ed Mark
2007 Buffalo City Chess Champion
National Master Lionel Davis with son Shaka playing an ultramodern game
Arthur Jones, a graduate of Howard University, developed a patented form of chess in which the player of the black pieces always moves first. His black pieces were colored red, black and green; while the white ones were red, white and blue.This was during the late sixties/early seventies and I think in response to the Black Power social movement of that era.Mr. Jones invested more than $50,000 us dollars in equipment alone, travelling to China to build and purchase the boards and pieces.He was a generous patron of the game for many years and thou he is still in SC, I have not seen him in several years.
Chess is a reflection of the culture in which it is practiced.And modern chess is a product of a white dominant class. One would be naive not to realize the significance of white moving first.
White moving first has some racial symbolism, but from a chess standpoint, does the first move really offer any advantage? Personally, I do not believe so. If we are arguing that black should move first because of racial symbolism then that is one thing. If we are arguing that black should move first to negate white’s perceived advantage, then that is something else.
When I play the black pieces, I never play to equalize. Why think in those terms? The object is to win the game regardless of the color you have. If you look at lines in the Sicilian Sveshnikov, Sicilian Dragon, Sicilian Najdorf, King’s Indian, Benko Gambit and Marshall Gambit… do these practicioners say they’re trying to equalize?? No… they are trying to win!!
Black moving first will not change the equation, but if there is a need to negate white’s privilege, then perhaps the first move privilege should be determined at random. In other words, either white or black could move first depending on the algorithm. Each player would get a 50% chance to move first.
Personally I would rather have the first move and attempt to substain this intiative throughout the game. We see that in other phases of the game having the first move is often decisive, particularly the endgame. It is vital in obtaining the ” opposition,” in creating ” zugzwang” positions and in ” triangulation,” ironically referred to as losing a move.
Are we saying that a player’s first move automatically grants the initiative? Chess appears too dynamic (and too deep) for that conclusion. Otherwise we’d be playing an unfair game. However, chess is a game of universal duality where opposites neutralize. If one gets into the endgame then tempos (or lost tempos) may have already been determined elsewhere in the game.
We often hear that with best play by the strongest players, the game is likely to end in a draw. What happened to white’s initiative? I do believe there is a perception that white has an advantage. However, I believe that is due to the amount of effort toward finding a way for white to win… all the way back to the early days. I believe only now that opening resources for black have gained momentum. Most of the early material was “white-centric.” ALL the early books were “white to play and win.” However, some of the openings I mentioned and even openings like the Petroff are providing resources for black.
Why has the Petroff become practically unbeatable? Why is the Center Counter playable (after moving the queen all over the place with black)? Because we have dynamism in chess. These laws are dynamic so that such concrete concepts such as the first move, pawn structure, or even a strong center are not universal truths… merely rules that followed and/or broken at specific times.
I remember interviewing Maurice Ashley (listen to Part 3 in “The Mind of a Grandmaster“) and he was talking about chess understanding. He said that weaker players are often bogged down with chess principles and that they often get in the way of the truth of the position. For example, we are taught not to double pawns and that we should not develop knights on the rim or leave our king in the center. Looking at high-level chess, they violate these rules routinely because they understand that dynamism exists. They are looking more at the truths and not the concrete principles of chess. The principle that white has an advantage is one that I believe is based on a principle and not the truisms of chess.
Perhaps we are seeing (that black theory is catching up) that the advantage of the first move is an illusion. Perhaps in chess we are finding the law of duality, but chess is still in it infancy stages in terms of theory. Notice how openings come and go… and come back again. I remember Alexander Morozevich saying in an interview that “Garry Kasparov doesn’t know a damned thing about chess.” They were discussing the depth of chess and why he plays such unorthodox ideas. Players like Morozevich and Hikaru Nakamura have tried breaking so many laws and I believe that is what Lionel Davis means in terms of “ultramodernism.” I accept that argument… but not the first mover theory. There is still so much to learn about what chess is.
Hello, I just wanted to thank Eddie Mark for his entry. It helped me
to clarify a few things. Our ability to recognize a given paradigm’s
impact on our perception and creativity is key to our level of
performance! Also, it seems that Buffalo Chess deserves our
support. Keep up the battle of ideas…Peace.
The original chessboard and pieces of Mr. William Zachery whom we respectfully dedicate Ultramodern Theory We call this photo “Begin Again” we offer our gratitude, peace, and love.
I did an analysis of my wins and losses dating all the way back to the mid 1990’s when I began playing chess. I was amazed to discover that about 65% of my wins occured when I played with the black pieces.
Most of my losses actually occured when I played white.
Just thought it was interesting.
Ed Mark 2007 Buffalo City Chess Champion
You’re an animal with black! Sixty-five percent kill rate is crazy. Again… I don’t believe in the notion that white has an advantage with the first move. It doesn’t make sense if you think of chess on a higher, metaphysical level. I just read an interesting article about Kasparov playing shogi with a strong Japanese players. Black moves first in shogi.
https://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4544
Ultramodern C-H-E-S-S Complex Harmony of Enigmatic yet Simple Solutions
Yes brother Shabazz it was necessary to study Bruce Lee ideas of Jeet Kune Do in order to understand Fischers methods, nice catch, i was just checking out another great teacher and he said,”Even if you are a minority of one the truth is still the truth”. Peace
It only has racial overtones if you read that into it or allow it.
It’s not White that has the advantage.
Its whoever moves first that has the advantage.
Or so they say!
Some people grew up playing with tan and brown pieces.
My favorite set from my childhood is tan and brown.
I lost a tan pawn from that set many years ago.
I looked everywhere and for many years, I just couldn’t find that pawn.
I carried those 31 other pieces around forever.
Then I had decided to sell the house that I grew up in.
I was cleaning out the basement and over in a corner that I had searched too many times to remember, I found that missing pawn after 30 plus years.
Boy oh boy was I happy!
Back together again!
That tan and brown piece set is still my favorite today.
I have many good memories playing friends with that set, regardless of the outcome of the games.
Oh!
And a big HIP HIP HOORAY for Kayin.
sudic,
Great story!
I believe Lionel is referring to the history of creating the “white first” rule. It DID have a racial connotation initially. Saying that, I do not believe white has an advantage at all. Chess is not so simple to be boiled down to the first move. Has anyone ever analyzed a game and said, “I played 44.Ng3 winning… this was because of 1.e4.” Certainly the first move is related to the winning move, but it did not cause the winning move.
As I said above, this perception simply makes us push harder with the “lighter” pieces and study more to find an advantage. We have been conditioned to believe that the lighter color has an advantage. I don’t buy it. It is said that with perfect play between players of eilite strength, the game is a draw… well how can that be? Where would the lighter color have LOST the advantage??
Whether white or black moves first, chess is a fair contest. We need to deprogram ourselves and perhaps be a bit less biased toward the white pieces as a chess community. Grandmasters are certainly programmed too. If a chess program can give GMs pawn and move odds and win with black, these theories are debunked. I would imagine that other strong GMs will eventually see that drawing with the “black” pieces is not necessarily an accomplishment.
Oh sudic… Marvin Johnson posted here recently! 🙂
Brother Shabazz i didnt mean to infer that only top players like Naka, Carlsen, Moro, etc. can play Ultramodern Chess in fact they are merely immitating its basic functions and were successful in a few games. This science is for all chessplayers, but at the same time we are here to prove that we are on top of world chess as descendants of the African continent and no separations, denials of visas, deceptions or tricks can hold us.i went to susan polgar site and saw the fide president making the first move for black and white so they have more respect for our people than they are willing to admit, Now we are in the process of exposing their previous sciences as being limited and self restrictive.They are trying to study our science and use it for their own advances but like we elavated the game of basketball so too with chess. After meeting Fischer on icc we presented him with an Ultramodern line to expose this “white advantage of the first move” idea:1f3 e5 2g4 Qh4!# a fools mate and if – 1e4 f6 2Qh5 g6! 3Be2 gh 4Bh5# (four moves-if white had the advantage it wouldnt take longer) Fischer shot back: 1e4 f6 2 d4 (improvement) g5 3Qh5!#. I was blessed to have meet the chess legend and when i spoke to him he only responded in symbolism not words, !,!? , ahh, ok, or game? Having said all this it is hopeful that we move closer to a greater understanding and respect for the game of chess for mother Africa its chess players and all the worlds peoples. Peace-Love and YES WE CAN!
Isn’t this sort of idea a bit dated?
White/Black as in objects not quite the same as White/Black in describing human beings…is anybody actually “white” in the literal sense? Or “black” in the literal sense? Never mind.
There are racial epithets used with the terms, but sometimes we read a bit too deep, stuff that isn’t there. This isn’t Fanon and Last Poets and Carmichael stuff…paint the pieces any colour…
Anyhow, if chess was developed in India…or the standardised pieces after Staunton, don’t think we were much of an afterthought re which colour should move first.
If it’s a white bishop or a black bishop, it’s a bit of plastic painted a colour – nothing to do with me as a person…or have we got that hung up…
This sounds like a typical PC/american college/Black Studies riff…
hope the ‘brothas’ are “in the black” with ‘enuff’ funds for 2010…
Peace and play the pipes of peace…even if it’s the chillum pipe.
Woody,
You can read the thread. I don’t subscribe to their being an advantage of moving first, but there was a historic reason that white has the first move in chess. The same way that “Thanksgiving” is actually a commemoration of the fall of the Moors of Spain, chess has a history. After the Moors (Blacks) were driven out of Spain, the rules of chess were changed to suit Catholic royalties (King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella). I’ve written extensively on this topic here.
However, I’m fine with either color moving first. What I would like is more acceptance of Fischer Random where the value of the first move is minimized ever more.
Well, woody on Jan17,2009 a letter will be sent to President Barack Obama requesting his endorsement on changing this unfair rule thereby forcing them to bear witness to the truth. As a matter of fact if you study all their rule books it will be clear, that, everyone of them distributes justice equally save for this one concept, which their 1st World Champ Steinitz endorsed in the 1800’s ,the days of eurocentric misdirectiion is clearly coming to an end and all that will remain is truth. My brothers, Vishy’s recent play moved chess to the next level (i.e. beyond their european sciences) and if you go to any website of your choosing you will note that they are unable to explain “Kramniks collapse” so their lack on knowledge will force them to resort to their machines, things without intellect(i.e. artificial intelligence- fritz, rybka, hydra) to try and find answers.The irony is that they are the people who programmed their machines with the old ideas(i.e. romantic, classical, hypermoderns, etc.), and, they have the audacity to blame Kramnik who is just one man, when centuries of lies are being exposed. Brother Shabazz we are eternally grateful you have provide us with such a wonderful site and it is important for you/us to know that when you presented the world with an !? idea about 1e5! on Dec.25 2007 the whole chess world saw it and then we looked up a “few days later” there was a “reverse strategy” in place during the recent chess championship( even their russian great Kasparov complained about Kramnik’s use of their old match strategy-play to win with white and draw with black.). So perhaps woody is right their ideas concerning white over black is a bit dated and in theses current times Black Wins!! Peace-Love and Yes We Can
Concerning the idea behind the :!!! After studying the old sciences lets say the romantics ,the classics, the hypermoderns etc. it became clear that many of their concepts had a egotistical tone to them,so when i logged onto the ICC as the Ultramodernist- I began to use the triple exclaim to expose the redundancy in giving various moves thourghout a game of chess either an !or !! . so we go a degree higher and throw the triple exclaim in their faces.The idea is basically simple: if you find a good move and it is awarded an exclaim thats fine,the problem comes in when the previous sciences continue to give exclaims thoughout the game as if they are doing something brilliant when in fact they are not. lets say we all agree that 1+1=2 ok, exclaim right answer ,then we continue this idea with 2+1= 3 with this being the next logical sequence there is no reason to give a !! to a simple truth,if you study their old books you will see this is one of the simple flaws of the hypermoderns(exxagerrating). So now you have the historic reason behind the !!! Ubuntu – Peace.
There will be some insites into our chess science at : http//ultramodernchess.blogspot.com Peace.
Lionel,
I’m not sure of the importance of !!! but I know Tate used to always say “Triple exclam” in his animated analysis. I’m not sure it adds anything except a little bit of melodrama. 🙂 I do think the use of exclams should be used as sparingly as possible. I’m also not sure it has anything to do with hypermodern chess theory. I will agree with you that we probably do not have enough ways to express ideas in our chess symbology. That’s a different matter.
Brothers on January 1, 2009 we will introduce Ultramodern Chess Science on a high competitive level and bring it to their fide tournaments this will be the final blog for some time, it seems its time for a bit of competitive play. PEACE.
Slav Defence meran variation sl9.7 (D49) The Variation that Decided The World Championship by Peter Lukacs and Laszlo Hazai (special contributions by Anand and P.H. Nielsen).If you go to the middle of the page you will read the admission that their traditional ideas has reach an end, Its says The position is extremely sharp and without deep computer analysis no one can find the right moves. Peace- Ultramodern
Kasparov is the “WHITE ADVOCATE” he now states,”d4 ALWAYS offer you a variety of options.It doesnt meant that e4 is weak,but its no accident that leading players are ALL moving to d4.With e4 there are too many complex problems that WHITE has to solve.” This comment is in chesslife march 2009 pg.36. This is the subtle disrespect thats been going on since they been trying to write books on chess. To the eurocentric thinking players let us clarify something here if you think you like that “transboard action of the knight with the fpawn idea you aint seen nuttin. I’ll be on ICC as ULTRAMODERNIST, and at some of your international events soon, lets go.
Well Kasparov can say what he wants because he has the knowledge and reputation. I agree that 1.e4 lines are a lot more concrete, but that doesn’t mean 1.d4 is better. Top players just prefer to avoid lines where you’re analyzing to mate. The 1.e4 games are more tactical since the e-pawn is undefended and many themes center around capturing the center. Black may have more resources to neutralize white’s first move.
My sincere apologies to all my people for not representing Ultramodern Chess Strategies in the utmost way at the recent 2009 Marchand Open , however i did have the pleasure of playing alongside brother Oladapu which is a very rate thing for me personally and secondly IM Lenderman and Gm Kaschevilli who is currently on the cover of chess life mag. got a small example of our science in action and judging by the expressions on their face came away mildly impressed for now, you know reality is really something! haha . Yo Gata now i got a small taste of how you feel about losing to Topolov, believe it or not my loss on time is roughly about 3 times as bad merely because of the science ,anyway, the goal is to rise above 2600 fide then retire from their form of competitive chess.(im not sure what kinda rating theses people ever gave us.) Brother Shabazz we thank you for being the Change that President Obama often refers to, you know i cant wait to the day when were old an gray, we gunna be on the floor laughing our heads off,while Diamond and the girls do their thing! Yo anybody got any Chocolate Icecream! hahaha Peace.
The Fischer Clock’s design is in direct correlation to Ultramodern Chess Knowledge and its proper use can only be realized with an Afrocentric idea in mind or techniques i would refer to as “The Black Chess”. Peace. see u in Philly.
In 1997 International Arbiter Jerome Bibuld received a letter stating (1) I am the First African American Chess Scientist in the World (2) also the strongest. Its clear the rest of the world has begun to bear witness to the truth and has included the Afrocentric Knight Star idea into their studies, first danielsen in Norway on utube, then Chessbase last week with- Swedish Chessboxing sensation in London- ne5 Now Fide just included it into their laws of chess- section 3.6, this is a basic Ultramodern demonstration on the power of a centralized knight (the white horse) v.s. the decentralized piece on g8. This is being pointed out to ensure we as a race of people as well as a country do not get too far behind the rest of the world. My Instructor Bobby Fischer always said to keep your ideas in your head and dont write anything down, now its clear why, its curious to me if we dont know anything about chess why are they still trying sneak around, hmm could it be fear? BLESS.
Kirsan Ilyumzhinov and K.Tszyu Foolsmate? Well Fischer’s line takes nine squares and so do the idea you present on your fide site with e6 instead of e5 so i guess youve found an equal line. Ilyum i was doing an Ultranalysis: BlackKing on h8- WhiteKing on h1,Qf7, Ng5, White to move and mate!{of course – this is how all yall books go,well at least until you got hit in the face by the Chessdrum in 2007.} Anyway according to the European Assizes Qh7 or Qf8 both mates and wins but the Fischer followers KNOW QF8#!!! is much more accurate and Qh7 is dubious at best. Maybe um krazy-Mathis hey Chessdrummer did yall know my son was on that show March 9 20091 hahahaa Bless.
Good day fellow chessdrummers and hello to some of the newly acquired “Ultramodernist” or Nontraditional chess practioners, just seen some of your recent tournament games at Chessgames.com where there was an interesting effort to explore the Afrocentric idea where Black can strategically weaken the e6 square and play f5 not fearing” WHITE’S BIG ATTACK”!! Maurice i had this idea back in 96′ this is why i opted out of our second blitz match you would have been restricted by what Fischer called “The Old Chess” just go over the games and you will see this idea forces their top guys to lose their “chess rhytm” look what happened to Kramnik in Bonn.See brother Shabazz i told you we are the best,India and China is up there with us too. Karpov Ne6 not too bad huh? Yo Peter Kuzdorfer you still around? look whats happening all the way outta da hood of Buffalo N.Y., Bem started this stuff years ago! He never believed in the Eurocentric analysis {white’s plus over equal} i guess it just stayed with me, oh Kurtzie thanks for crushing me, i took it out on the gms on the icc, but when i played Bobby he threw me across the street! hehe. Bless.
If you teach a Russian to play chess it will initially surprise him,then he may switch over to backgammon and start crushing everyone in site saying “Lionel they are all fish, they dont know anything about chess all you have to do is get used to the luck of the dice and you will crush them”, I laugh at the thought,but then that would make me a chessplayer playing backgammon like Natanzon, or lets say basketball, then a chessplayer playing in the NBA , so i guess we as descendants of Africa have not much else but to leave you with this , the next time you analyze with a member of the “old chess” just drop the pieces in the center of the board, sit back and watch them race to grab the WHITE PIECES, every time! Subconciously they think they have an advantage just being WHITE even in analysis they will NEVER grab the BLACKIES, pleaz be careful of their tricks! Yo Assizes i just heard a song by the New Boys they sing Your’re a Jerk! You’re a Jerk , yo i hit the floor haha ,they funny!
Today is President Obama’s birthday and i would like to take this time to suggest to all chessplayers who seek a new way forward to begin to study all chess books and databases from black’s perspective only, for at least a year , Aug.4 2009- Aug. 4 2010. I’m quite certain you will find this exercise very stimulating, also the feeling of inferioriority with the black pieces will cease to exist, this idea is designed to counter centuries of manipulation by the “traditionalist” or what Fischer called “The Old Chess”. We appreciate the respect you have shown and we reciprocate. Bless.
Mr. Kasparov what took you so long? When i told Fischer about this science his response was immediate acceptance, surprising even me,i guess thats why he’s a genius,anyway i remember as a teenager there was this old white guy by the name of Ed. Schmidt who used to give me money to play in tournaments and tell me Fischer stories! You know for the life of me i couldnt figure out why he kept doing this, well i never got a chance to ask! Now i know though, thats why ive decide to enhance the old rating system by adding the Ultramodern Ranking Color Code System (Afrocentric Study) , oh its ony five colors right now, Red-Green-Black-Silver-and Gold i had this idea on icc a few years back, ask Fide they know, i think they got some kinda trainer thing goin im not sure, anyway nice game. See Brother Shabazz you didnt know i had my white brothers hiding in the back ground huh? hehe. Peace.
Why don’t you call the pieces Green and Purple, learn to play like a 2700, and stop this nonsensical talk:
“Brother Shabazz i didnt mean to infer that only top players like Naka, Carlsen, Moro, etc. can play Ultramodern Chess in fact they are merely immitating its basic functions and were successful in a few games. This science is for all chessplayers, but at the same time we are here to prove that we are on top of world chess as descendants of the African continent”
You’ll prove your theories by winning, not talking.
Is Kasparov throwing Botvinnik “under the bus” ? On pg. 24 Botvinnik 100 selected games it says, “What are the principles of our school? First and foremost I must mention our scientific approach to chess” (The Russians). Yet recently Garry claims chess is just a game not a science, so its clear they want to distract, to create doubt among us,as if we dont have our own interpretation of chess, while they train and study with the “transboard action of the Knight” idea, as a matter of fact Judith Polgar was just crushing this guy Ivanchuck with this idea , and now they wanna play dumb,cool ,that means we Peacin. Kasparov remember this when a black man mentions his mother, that means something coming your way. A few years after Fischer won the Title in 72′ a young woman enters a night club called the Checkerboard in Buffalo, N.Y. (now called Birchfields), with her 8-9 year old son in hand , to play chess for money, we win. Shortly thereafter she ask her son what does he want to be when he grows up , he says the usual things Policeman, fireman, motorcycleman, etc. She responds by saying ,” I want you to get a job doing something with your brain”, and so here i am living the wise words of women. Theses tournament games i will play against their gms will go into the 5th book on Ultramodern Chess Knowledge. Thanks to you Mama, and to you Madear! and whats up Connie i love you all in Atlanta Georgia, be there soon! Peace and Love to you all here at the Chessdrum and greatess gratitude to Brother Shabazz for providing us with this wonderful time to display our interpretation of the Royal Game we know as CHESS.
I have carefully given much thought to the general and specific idea my friend & former student Lionel Davis offers with his black move first concept. As I have been taught so will I teach, but always searching for the truth in all things! My mother Sara Davis taught me as a child that I have the same capabilities as the next person and I believed this as if it were the gospel! I have been bless to have many encouraging people in my life as I believe this type of association lends itself to a more productive life style spiritually. It is truly amazing that all of the stronger player in Buffalo NY who have study together, shared thoughts, ideas and struggled with the concepts of life share too many thing in common! Eddie Mark, Lionel Davis, Bem Tyhiemba & Dugolas Dubose & Barry Davis all have a higher winning percentage with the black pieces! But I would like to offer a possible explanation for this, a long time ago there was much conversation about “white having the advantage of the first move!” Some may have forgotten but I remember a response to this statement as clear as day, as though it were yesterday. The first move affords white the “precondition” to establish an advantage but that in and of it self does not confer an advantage to whom ever moves first! Having the inititative is one thing…knowing what to do with it is another! Peace to you, Brother Shabazz as you continue to give us a forum to communicate an share information and ideas
Fischer’s error was in believing that his name was synonymous with World Champion, although he hasn’t been defeated in a championship match, we have his Chess DNA {games} therefore, he can still be bested. Fischer’s so-called genius is merely simple mathematics according to the Ultramodern Chess Studies, and anyone can play chess well, regardless of age, race, gender, and all these superflous things. On December 21, 2007 the first Ultramodern DVD was created to demystify the game so that i can be learned quickly and accurately by thoses who seek to do so,apparently the march of chess ideas continues. {side note: They may call Naka (2700+ on the old scale) a blitz player overseas, however in the U.S. we believe its the traditional sciences that are too slow to keep up with “speed of thought” required for a modern interpretation of chess, hence Ultramodernism, Vishy had similiar difficulites in the 95′ match vs. Garry.} Happy Birthday Shaka! Hi Daddy! Hi Susan Polgar , U.S. Amazing! Peace.
MADEA – came to Buffalo N.Y. wearing a blue baseball cap, it read : President Barack Obama. Now she is is the REAL MADEA , not some guy named Tyler Perry down the street in Atlanta Georgia wearing a dress, smiling and making tricks! This is the Madea that picked cotton in fields and nutured the young and took care of US and wiped our lil noses , the mother of the earth, Madea. So I asked her, What do you think about President Obama? she looked at me looked away and said, HE GOT IT! I said, He got it? He got what? searching for more answers, of course she knew what i was doing ,so she looked away from me, looked straight ahead then UP and pointed and said HE- GOT- IT!!! Now, for thoses of you who dont know who Madea really is , allow me to put it this way, when Madea expresses a thing, anything, IT IS! So when President Obama came to Buffalo on May, 15 2010 i went down there to see the man who said, “We are living in a time of CHANGE”, and as chessplayers we know chess changes when society change, so look at the White House then look at the chessboard and its new perspective, its new ideas, a new understanding and you recognize that its here in the United States its not Fischer or in this case Lionel Davis the “ULTRAMODERNIST”, although i do recognize that the chess ideas do flow throw my being. I’m in the Jefferson Library right now if this wasnt here you wouldnt be an ULTRAMODERN KNOWER yourself today, so congratulations on your newchess evolution. Ultramodernism is the future of chess and its just beginning so its not clear why best learners are calling themselves geniuses for something basic to this science! HAPPY BIRTHDAY MADEA!!! from your grandson – goy- and shaka. Peace.