I discovered this all-too-real post on teacher and chess coach Elizabeth Vicary's blog:
I remember at one Pan-Ams (collegiate!) a player asked me for something to play against the Petroff defence, because it always made his games so boring. So I showed him the Boden-Kieseritzky gambit: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nxe4 4.Nc3 Nxc3 5.dxc3
Great for 1700 players, right? He was especially excited by the possibility of 5...d6? 6.Nxe5 dxe5? 7.Bxf7+ & Qxd8.
In his very next game, his opponent plays the Petroff Defence and I happily stand behind his board, ready to watch him kick butt. I see 3.Bc4 Nxe4 and then on the board appears 4.Bxf7+? Kxf7 5.Nxe5+ followed by typical 1700 madness. I nearly smacked him on the back of the head while he was still sitting at the board.
Black kept his extra piece throughout the game, and won the pawn back, and they finally reached a bare R vs R + B ending, where Black immediately agreed to a draw because he'd heard that this ending was drawn.
I guess this is an example of equalizing the agony of the chess coaches...
Part of me sympathizes with Ms. Vicary: how often heart-felt advice falls on inattentive ears...
Another part of me has to point out "More Jerome-izing" and "Wasn't Me!"
