TD, hang on a minute.
As Tarhunnas himself pointed out he did not play MT any different then he would otherwise and I dare say he proved his point by doing so in our game.
Secondly, a forward defense is effective up to a point. It is not easy to break, but once the odds are starting to go against the Soviet player, discretion is certainly the better part of valour.
Now I can sense you are in a worked up state and are going to try to use this game to prove your point that the Soviets are doomed to lose in 41. I would recommend caution. The important bit to remember is that what happened historically is only a a guideline to achieve historical plausibility. From the first move historical comparisons are just like comparing the previous years football final with the current. They should follow the same rules, but all the rest is just nice to know.
Tarhunnas chose his own strategy, he was not forced to fight forward or stay as long as he did in certain places. So the main lesson I take away is one I've been preaching all along, fighting forward to "much" is very risky. Sometimes you'll get away with it, most of the times you won't. As to what is too much depends on the German player.
Finally, the last thing I'm after is a pat on the back from anyone, including you, but breaking such a determined defense does require skill and judging from the whining of several individuals (being very quiet these days) breaking such a forward defense was put in doubt, let alone a run-away defense.
I'm about to start my game with Michael and I'm looking forward to see what he will come up with.
< Message edited by glvaca -- 6/22/2012 10:25:06 PM >