Talk:Ruy Lopez

Open Games Bad Link

The Open Games link (4th link under History) goes to an open source software Wiki entry instead of Open (pawn structure) Chess games, which is an entirely different thing (2. Nf3 3.d4 is the "Open" Sicilian, having nothing to do with open source software code). Open games are sharp with complex variations in most lines. I can't find an Open Games (chess) entry in the project yet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.117.202.139 (talk • contribs) 18:55, 9 September 2009

After Main line alternative 5...Be7 Nc3

How about this move? i believe previous world champion spassky played this move a couple of times in '88 — Preceding unsigned comment added by PrussianDream (talk • contribs) 11:20, 29 July 2009

Erroneous citation in the Berlin defense Rio gambit

Since Black's third move does not threaten to win the e-pawn—if Black captures it, White will win back the pawn on e5 [57]

There is nothing at all like that on page 52 of the 2003 edition "Play Winning Chess", as reference [57] indicates. The entire page is wholly dedicated to explaining the en passant rule. This citation should be fixed (or better, replaced with the lines that prove the author's point here).

108.45.46.243 (talk) 22:22, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

3...Bd6

Does it have a name? It's been played a few times starting with Stanley-Schulten 1846. It's less ridiculous than some of the openings people try to add to wikipedia. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 17:41, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Anyone know why it's called the Martinez Variation?

Obviously it's a common surname, but I don't know of any famous chess players with that name. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 10:31, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

OK I found this game, but it wasn't the first appearance of 6.d3 (a fairly natural move) and I never heard the term "Martinez Variation" until the 2023 World Championship. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 10:48, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Removed a dubious claim that somehow remained in the article for years

This ahistorical nonsense had been in the article for longer than a decade:

Traditionally, White's objective in playing the Ruy Lopez is to spoil Black's pawn structure; either way Black recaptures following the exchange on c6 will have negative features, although recapturing gains the bishop pair.[Gary Lane 2006, The Ruy Lopez Explained] In modern practice, however, White does not usually exchange bishop for knight on c6, preferring the retreat 4.Ba4 if chased by 3...a6.

Trying to figure out how that got in I see at one point in 2009 it instead said this:

Traditionally, White's objective in playing the Ruy Lopez is for the destruction of Black's pawn structure at an early and tender stage in development. Not only does the Ruy Lopez trade double the pawn which takes the White bishop, but it is certain to draw off either the d or b pawns from their positions, either event being highly detrimental to Black's game because if the d pawn is drawn off, Black's attack on the center is handicapped and if the b pawn is drawn off, castling is prevented on that side and the c and a file pawns are left to future exposure. However, White does not always exchange light-squared bishop for queen's knight on c6, but only in the Exchange Variation (ECO C68-C69).

That's also terrible and not correct so it's no wonder it was changed, but the change made it even worse. Somehow I never noticed, and maybe no one else did either until Max spotted it. Quale (talk) 22:46, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

I'm still wondering what it says in the original source. Lane is usually citeable. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 01:19, 24 December 2024 (UTC)