14730 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
It's kinda sad. I still haven't had an answer to the OP, 24 pages of crap.
we gave you answers. You gave us replies. We tried to show you why your relpies were wrong. You still thought you were right. We showed how the "perfect opening" does not exist. You said you didnt get an answer
No actually here's how I look at this. The Parham is the benchmark, you gave me nothing better, so therefore the Parham is the best
I can name over 20 openings better than the parham. You just dont want to play them because you dont trust your own ability to create a win out of a gambit and you want an attack right out of the opening.
But, for your level, as ive been saying, the parham is great. By all means keep playing it.
With the Parham as the benchmark, I could say that the Grob Opening is the best.
The Parham in itself is not a bad opening per say, but compared to the Ruy Lopez, white does not have the normal opening advantage to work with. In addition, players who have not learned classical opening fundamentals will stunt their chess growth by learning poor piece placement habits.
But in the end, you can play what you want. Just don't expect to become a better player because of the parham. Maybe it might make you a better middlegame player because you won't be able to beat most good players with the opening ;)
I wouldn't say the ruy lopez is better for white... I'd say it's just equally cramped for each side. I don't want to play a gambit, but there's nothing more aggressive than the Parham without gambitting, so it looks like the Parham is pretty good.
Once again christiansoldier, stop talking down to me. You're rating is lower than mine, and I don't appreciate it.
I play much better OTB, but what does that matter in the grand scheme of things, the Bc5 version of the Italian is pleanty agressive, if YOU make it that way, for example after c3, which you dubbed as quiet, d4 is the plan, and some fireworks can develop because white is trying to prove this plan works, and black is trying to prevent it while pushing his own agenda that he needs to strike at the white K.
Ratings mean nothing. My rating is low and I can ( and have) beaten 2200-2400 a couple of times.(Most of those games wern't Blunders)
im not talking down to you. Im saying at your level. It doesnt even matter what my level is
I agree. Most people play better OTB. I use to play the Italian and I could create complications very easy.
Actually you usually go down a pawn or two after the c3 line.
yeah if I play Nf3 against e5 I go italian and evan's Gambit it. I most often play f4, OTB record, 1xx-0-0, online, 2x-1x-0 i do well with the KG, but here I mostly play it against people a couple hundred points above me. also the Ruy can turn very agressive, again its up to YOU, not the opening to make it that way, and the Parham is just as agressive as the Catalan IF your opponent knows how to play against it, which unfortunately most people don't
Why are you so afraid of gambits???
I wasn't talking about the Evans, I was talking about an immediate c3
Any attack can fall flat in chess. Otherwise, everyone would play that attack. So when your attack falls flat, would you rather be even or down in material?
there are more attacking chances in the KG than in the parham. parham is like a gambit, trading positional imbalances for an attack that doesnt work (against an opponent that knows what he is doing)
A sound attack gives enough compensation for a material defect. You will never get an attack out of thin air...
Yes, but any attack can fall short against someone who knows what they're doing, I'd rather have a small positional downfall, then be down in material.
actually no. there have been great grandmaster games where even when defended accurately it still loses. It depends on the middlegame and the players really, not the opening. That is why the parham is so good at the below 1500 level
Tal would sack pieces just because it "felt" right even though he played some of the best players that ever lived.
How to reach to 1600 in two months
by Elvisandro a few minutes ago
Beating people OTB is awkward
by LuftWaffles a few minutes ago
Your opening against carlsen
by charles_butternucker 3 minutes ago
1/26/2015 - Richard Teichmann vs. NN, Berlin, 1914
by chesschessjs 7 minutes ago
Saric and Naiditsch
by QXF7_PATZER 7 minutes ago
Tata Steel 2015 Rounds 14a 14b Proposal
by tigerprowl5 11 minutes ago
Need someone to stop me from smashing my laptop
by DjonniDerevnja 16 minutes ago
A.R.B. Chess System
by Bronco70 19 minutes ago
Anyone know how to fix avatar?
by findingmrchessguy17 22 minutes ago
Post your best miniatures here
by CerebralAssassin19 28 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2015 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!