Forums

2 Opening questions!

Sort:
Tacticoco

Is there a way to reach this position any other way?

Is the Dunst Opening refuted?

Thank you if you anwser the questions!

ghostofmaroczy

Why the hell did you post two questions??

Can you not focus on one thing at a time?

PeskyGnat

The Dunst line you gave is completely playable for White and isn't refuted, the ideas are in line with a King's Indian Attack, or KID reversed.  I myself would gladly play 1. e4 d5 2. Nc3 everygame if I knew Black would play 2...d4, unfortuntely, I don't like 2...dxe4, or even 2...Nf6 transposing to an Alekhine's defense line.

ghostofmaroczy

See how PeskyGnat answered only the second question.

This reminds me of press conferences and radio calls where the asker obliterates their own first question.  The person will only address the second question.

PeskyGnat

I answered the 2nd question only because it's a line I personally play and can advocate as an unbalancing way for White to play :)  As for King's Gambit...I'm completely clueless!

Sqod

Just use a little logic for an answer to the first question. White must move his f-pawn before his knight to reach the shown position, which rules out the standard opening 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3. Therefore White would have to use the Bishop's Opening (1. e4 e5 2. Bc4). But the remaining moves by Black need to be ...Be7 and ...Bh4, which incidentally moves the same piece twice in the opening. White is so close to a Scholar's Mate while Black's e-pawn is hanging at e5 that White's only logical response would be Qh5 (1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Be7 3. Qh5), threatening mate in one (Qxf7#), which would render any of the shown Black responses (...Bh4) suicidal. Only if White were being unusually passive with the following moves could the shown position arise by transposition:

1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Be7 3. f4 exf4 4. Nf3 Bh4+ 5. g3 etc.

Now am I going to be told why I just spent my time on this question? Smile

Tacticoco
Sqod wrote:

Just use a little logic for an answer to the first question. White must move his f-pawn before his knight to reach the shown position, which rules out the standard opening 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3. Therefore White would have to use the Bishop's Opening (1. e4 e5 2. Bc4). But the remaining moves by Black need to be ...Be7 and ...Bh4, which incidentally moves the same piece twice in the opening. White is so close to a Scholar's Mate while Black's e-pawn is hanging at e5 that White's only logical response would be Qh5 (1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Be7 3. Qh5), threatening mate in one (Qxf7#), which would render any of the shown Black responses (...Bh4) suicidal. Only if White were being unusually passive with the following moves could the shown position arise by transposition:

1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Be7 3. f4 exf4 4. Nf3 Bh4+ 5. g3 etc.

Now am I going to be told why I just spent my time on this question?

Well the Opening is called the Bertins gambit and I honestly find it fun to play with friends in real life.But no one plays the CunningHam defense (3..Be7) so I wondering how black could reach this postion in another move order.

Sqod

Thanks. It sounds like you'd have more luck finding someone to play the Cunningham Defense than finding someone who overlooks a mating opportunity, though.

Tacticoco
PeskyGnat wrote:

The Dunst line you gave is completely playable for White and isn't refuted, the ideas are in line with a King's Indian Attack, or KID reversed.  I myself would gladly play 1. e4 d5 2. Nc3 everygame if I knew Black would play 2...d4, unfortuntely, I don't like 2...dxe4, or even 2...Nf6 transposing to an Alekhine's defense line.

How does the bishop continue to do anything?

ghostofmaroczy
Tacticoco mentioned meat:

no one plays the CunningHam defense

I play the SlyTurkey

eciruam
Fiveofswords wrote:

what on earth do you mean...another way?

 



Best post for ages...loved the knights waltz....very surreal King's Gambit Cool

ghostofmaroczy
eciruam is maurice backwards:

Best post for ages...loved the knights waltz....very surreal King's Gambit

Hi Maurice!

PeskyGnat
icyviper wrote:

1. another way....easy  1. f4 e5 (a known gambit line)  2. e4  etc.

2. I often play that Dunst thing without knowing it was called that.  Can be quite good, though I've always wondered why black never tried 2...Nf6 (nice var of the Alekhine)

2. As someone who plays this as Black from time to time, I found that line quite fun, but you need to be a little prepared for some of the variations after 3. e5, maybe it's just less likely for a Scandinavian player to run into it due to Nf6 not being played.

ghostofmaroczy
icyviper slithered coldly:

1. another way....easy  1. f4 e5 (a known gambit line)  2. e4  etc.

Brilliant.

eciruam
ghostofmaroczy wrote:
eciruam is maurice backwards:

Best post for ages...loved the knights waltz....very surreal King's Gambit

Hi Maurice!

Hi yourself !

ghostofmaroczy
eciruam said hi:
ghostofmaroczy saw the name maurice:
eciruam is maurice backwards:

Best post for ages...loved the knights waltz....very surreal King's Gambit

Hi Maurice!

Hi yourself !

flesruoy

Chess_Troller

Whats up, yo?