you mean this one??10-14?? Denny. 5th best way to begin the game.
10-14 24-19!(A) 6-10 (14-18 or 11-16 White better) 22-17 9-13 [11-15 17-13 (26-22

Outstanding Ustica KM.

Yeah but I thinking more along the lines of 10-14, 22-18, 7-10 opening 65 in the ACF Deck. But I like you line of play beter thank you

Wow. You gentlemen are super advanced. This is much appreciated. I will get a board set up and follow along.

OPENING 10-14. 22-18, 7-10

10-14, 22-18, 7-10 (A), 25-22 (B), 11-16 (C), 18-15 (D), 10-19, 24-15, 14-18 (E), 23-14, 9-25, 29-22, 3-7 (F), 22-18, 7-10, 27-24, 10-19, 24-15, 16-19, 21-17(G

.A) One of the newer openings introduced into the official ACF ballot in 1970, but the White attacks are somewhat stilted. The late Prof. W.R. Fraser, of Montreal, Canada used this twice in free-style play vs. Tom Wiswell, in their 1960 title match. Since he was 'scorched' twice with it, he entitled it "Eraser's Inferno", but it is hardly that hot!...

B) The only move to secure new play, as 24-20, 24-19 or 26-22 transpose into openings shown later in this book.

C) One of the key moves to sustain the soundness of this opening. The natural 3-7 follow-up (as in Opening #45 ) does not work in this case after White's *29-25, and all replies have been shown to lose in 'Master-Play'..

D) This middle exchange opens the position to some extent, and has been played by Marion Tinsley on occasion. There are two additional major choices:

1) 24-20, *16-19 ( in contrast to #2 in this note, this is forced, and 8-11 loses, with White one move ahead, after 27-24, 10-15, 24-19 etc; see ACFB #159, page 60.) 23-16, 12-19, 27-23 ( as 18-15 is an ancient Robertson Guide Bristol; 11-16, 24-20, 16-19, 23-16, 12-19,22-18, 10-14, 18-15, 7-10, 25-22, but still capable of producing new play.) 8-12, 23-16, 14-23 ( it is now best to Play a piece short for a time, as 12-19 allows the powerful 18-15, with a possible win. See analysis by Jim Keene and Ed Ebert in "Master Checkers"Vol.5, #3, p.22) 26-19, 4-8 ( this delay is easier then the immediate 10-15, 19-10, 12-19, as both the 10-7 pitch or 30-26 give White excellent chances.) 32-27 ( or 22-18, 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 29-25, 2-7, 25-22, 10-15, 19-10, 12-19, 22-17, 6-15, 17-10, 7-14, 32-27, 8-11, 30-26, 14-18, 27-23, 18-27, 31-24, 1-6, 21-17, 6-10, 17-13, 10-14, 13-9, 14-17, 9-6, 3-8, 6-2 then 15-18, 24-15, 18-22 to a draw. Don Lafferty vs. E.T. Rolader.) 2-7, 30-26, (or 22-18, 8-11, *19-15, 10-19, 27-24, 3-8, 24-15, 12-19, 30-26, 9-13, 29-25, 6-9, 31-27 and 7-10 etc. Draws; Keith Todd v. John Caldwell, 1970 mail game. But if White tries to hold on to the piece with 31-26 at first instead of 22-18, then 8-11, 27-23, 9-13, 29-25, 6-9, 22-18, 3-8, 25-22, 10-14, 30-25, 1-6, 19-15, 12-19, 23-16, 14-30, 16-12,11-18, 12-3 and 7-10 etc; and he is repentant—Red Wins. Don Lafferty vs. Ron Johnson, in the 1973 Lakeside Ty.) 8-11, 29-25, (and again. White must be cautious, as 27-23, 9-13, 29-25, 5-9 etc; goes into a Red win from a Bristol, as in Stiles v. Gould; noted by E.F. Hunt, in Ryans"New Checkergram',' 12/34, p. 181.) 9-13, then the necessary return with 19-15, 10-19, 22-18, 6-9, 25-22, 1-6, 27-24, 3-8, 24-15, 12-19, and 22-17, etc. Drawn. K. Todd v. JD Williams, 1975 I-D mail ty.

2) 29-25 ( perhaps the natural development, which featured in the Fraser- Wiswell games.) now the cramp with *8-11 must be allowed, if White desires to use it. The 16-19 'dyke' loses a piece here, as there is insufficient backing; also 16-20 is bad after the 18-15 exchange, and lastly, 3-7, 24-20 is shown to win in M.P. page 184, Var.F.,.After 8-11, continue: 18-15 ( against the 24-20 pin, Red has just enough time to consolidate and save this entire opening with 10-15, 27-24, 6-10, 24-19, 15-24, 28-19, then *3-8 draws, as mentioned many years ago by Marion Tinsley in an interesting article published in "E.C.B.".page 1825, 4/52.Cont: 32-28, 9-13, 18-9, 5-14, now 28-24 is a mistake after 11-15! 20-11 and 1-6, but 22-18 instead, then both 1-5 or 1-6 will draw. See the 1976 Nat. Ty. games; Fuller v. Langdon.) 11-18, 22-15, 10-19, 24-15, *3-7 (Eraser's 9-13 vs. Wiswell is too great a handicap after either 15-10 or the 23-18 exchange.) 26-22,( or a Welsh cook with the 23-19 exchange, used in mail play by G. Davies and Wm. Edwards. Cont; 16-23, 26-19, 4-8..We prefer this over the immediate 14-17 x which allows 28-24; Todd v. Edwards..After 4-8, then 27-24— as 28-24 can now be met with the 6-10 exchange, and about even—now the 14-17 x is satisfactory, and 32-27, 5-9, 31-26, 9-13, 26-23, 6-10, 15-6, 1-10, 23-14, 10-17, 27-23, 8-11, 24-20, 7-10, 25-21, 17-22, 23-18, 2-6, 18-14 etc. and 13-17 drew. Fortman v. Edwards, in the 8th US-GB mail match.) 9-13, 31-26, *l6-19-prepared to play a piece short, which White is unable to retain- 23-16, 12-19, 27-23, *19-24, 28-19, 4-8, 32-27, ( or 21-17, 14-21, 32-27, 7-11, 23-18, 2-7, 27-24, 5-9, 24-20, 7-10, 19-16, 10-19, 16-7, 6-10, 7-3, 8-12, 3-7, 10-14 etc. Drawn M. Tinsley vs. E. Langdon; 1975 Lakeside Ty.) 7-11, 19-11, (also 22-18, 13-17, 18-9, 5-14, 19-16, 11-18, 16-12, and 11-16 etc; the Fraser analysis in "Art of Checkers"; later by M. Banks v. R. Bailey, 1974 Nat. Ty.) then 11-20 etc. draws after 22-18 and 6-10. Rex v. Romphf, in the world mail title play-offs; later by Childers v. Vestal in the 1978 I-D mail ty..... This entire 29-25 variation is limited to very few White attacks of substance, and after the two key moves are known ( the 3-8 in the 24-20 line, and the 16-19 exchange, followed with the 19-24 pitch in the 18-15 variation.) the defence has little to fear in the way of cooks.,..

E) Generally favoured, and no doubt best, although the 16-19 exchange may also be sound, as played by Rev.Vestal vs. the writer, in the ACF 200 club mail ty. As White's best attack against it goes into a variation of Opening #50-B ( 10-14, 23-19, 7-10 ) it will be shown there.

F) We prefer this as the more restrictive way, although 5-9 seems sound also, then 22-18, 3-7 ( or 9-13 first then 27-24; instead of 26-22- Langdon v. Tinsley, 1975 Lakeside; after 27-24, #3-7, 26-22, *8-11, 15-8, 4-11, 30-26, 6-10, 32-27, 16-20, 26-23, 1-5, 24-19, 2-6, 31-26, 6-9, 19-16 etc. Drawn. R. Chamberlain v. R. Romphf, in the world mail title play-offs.) 27-24, 9-13, 26-22, 8-11,5-8, 4-11, now White has the strong 24-20; instead of 30-26; a Vestal-Rex 1978 I-D mail game, to an eventual draw....

.G) Cont: 2-7.( not 5-9, 17-13, 1-5, than 15-10 etc; to a White win- Williams vs. Rex, 1975 I-D mail ty.) 31-27, 12-16, 17-13 ( White has nothing with 27-23 after 8-12. 16-20, 27-24, 20-27, 32-16, 8-11, 15-8, 4-20, 30-25, (if 26-23, 6-9 etc. draws. Rex v. Looser, 1978 I-D mail ty.) 6-10, 25-21, 10-14, 18-9, 5-14, 26-23, 7-11, 13-9, 11-15 and 23-19 etc. Drawn. Lloyd Hills vs. R. Fortman, 1977 6th vs. 7th Dist. mail match, and excellently played by the many-times Nebraska state champion

Supplementary play; 10-14, 22-18, 7-10, 25-22, 11-16, 29-25, 8-11, 18-15, 11-18, 22-15, 10-19, 24-15, 3-7, 26-22, 9-13, 31-26, 7-10(passing up the key *l6-19-see above.) 15-11, 10-15, 27-24, 5-9, 23-19, 16-23, 26-10, 6-15, & 24-19 etc. White Wins. E. Lowder vs. E. Bruch, 1979 Lakeside Ty....

Corrections

Trunk at note F .5-9 ( instead of 3-7) is no doubt best.

Trunk @ 15th move 7-10 as given loses ;instead 5-9 still draws

Trunk note G instead of 31-27 to draw, White has Tinsley`s 32-27* to winfor White, over the Editor in practice.See the 1980 ID mail booklet.

Note D var 2 . Instead of the 14-17 exchange Red has two good alternatives in 14-18 ( Fortman v M Long in mail play) or 7-10! As in Childers v m Long also in mail play.

Note F @ 3rd move. M Tinsley mentioned to the Editor that the 8-11 exchange ( instead of 3-7 ) is also sound after 26-23 and 6-10.

Note F @ 13th move.Instead of 30-26, White also has 24-20, as played in the 1980 Id mail ty

I have a lot of learning to do around here. Thank you kind sir. most impressive

Usurper could you repeat that? (J/K) Thanks for the work and research. Lobogal, I know you're reading this. Your comments please? LOL