Talk:Modern Chess Openings

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chess, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chess. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Chess Portal
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-Importance on the importance scale.

I started this page with information I could find on the internet. It is incomplete and sometimes contradictory, and some of it may be wrong. Please correct anything you can. Also, more needs to be said about this important book. Bubba73 (talk), 03:44, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

de Firmian admitts some subsections authored by others. The pages in reference to the English are an example of this. Should it be noted? --Mokru 02:55, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

The article, before I revised it, referred to Fine as being the first player of master strength to edit MCO. However, Griffith's Wikipedia entry says Griffith won the 1912 British championship, the only one he entered. That would seem to make him at least "master strength" as that term is understood today (I'm a USCF master, and I haven't won any national championships . . .). So I changed "master" to "grandmaster." (Fine was awarded that title in 1950, when FIDE began awarding titles). There is no reason to think that Griffith, White, Sergeant, etc. were of grandmaster strength. All were Brits, and Tony Miles (1976) is accepted as being the first English grandmaster (apart from the German-born Jacques Mieses). Undoubtedly Staunton, Blackburne and perhaps a few other Brits (e.g. Bird) would be considered GM's by today's standards, but there's no reason to think that Griffith, White et al. would be. Krakatoa 16:56, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

  • That sounds good to me. I thought a bit about that statement in the past, and your rewrite is probably best. Some of the original British editors were strong players, but none were grandmaster class. Quale 20:26, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Chess Openings the Easy Way

Should we mention Chess Openings the Easy Way, 2003, which was based on MCO-14? Bubba73 (talk), 03:49, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mid-importance

I have assessed the importance as Mid-importance, because:

  1. The claim in the article that this book is the most popular English language opening reference is not sourced, so I have to assume it is wrong.
  2. I have not been able to find an article about what would be the most popular Russian language opening reference, and if it would be rated High-importance. However, I would say that the Russian book would be more important than the English one, given the importance in chess of Russia and works in Russian language. Hence I would tend to think this could be a case of bias.

SyG (talk) 09:56, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] MCO

I noticed that MCO does not redirect here, and there isn't even a disambiguation page. Can somebody fix this?

Will do. SunCreator (talk) 00:39, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
There already was a MCO (disambiguation) and it was already listed from the MCO page. So nothing to do. SunCreator (talk) 00:44, 28 April 2008 (UTC)