Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Is anything better for me than the Parham?


  • 3 years ago · #401

    The_Gavinator

    It's kinda sad. I still haven't had an answer to the OP, 24 pages of crap.

  • 3 years ago · #402

    ChristianSoldier007

    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

  • 3 years ago · #403

    The_Gavinator

    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 Tongue out

  • 3 years ago · #404

    ChristianSoldier007

    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.

  • 3 years ago · #405

    Conquistador

    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 ;)

  • 3 years ago · #406

    The_Gavinator

    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.

  • 3 years ago · #407

    jetfighter13

    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.

  • 3 years ago · #408

    CHCL

    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)

  • 3 years ago · #409

    ChristianSoldier007

    im not talking down to you. Im saying at your level. It doesnt even matter what my level is

  • 3 years ago · #410

    CHCL

    jetfighter13 wrote:

    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.

    I agree. Most people play better OTB. I use to play the Italian and I could create complications very easy.

  • 3 years ago · #411

    The_Gavinator

    Actually you usually go down a pawn or two after the c3 line.

  • 3 years ago · #412

    jetfighter13

    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

  • 3 years ago · #413

    CHCL

    The_Gavinator wrote:

    Actually you usually go down a pawn or two after the c3 line.

    Why are you so afraid of gambits???

  • 3 years ago · #414

    jetfighter13

    I wasn't talking about the Evans, I was talking about an immediate c3

  • 3 years ago · #415

    The_Gavinator

    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?

  • 3 years ago · #416

    ChristianSoldier007

    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)

  • 3 years ago · #417

    CHCL

    A sound attack gives enough compensation for a material defect. You will never get an attack out of thin air...

  • 3 years ago · #418

    The_Gavinator

    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.

  • 3 years ago · #419

    ChristianSoldier007

    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

  • 3 years ago · #420

    CHCL

    Tal would sack pieces just because it "felt" right even though he played some of the best players that ever lived.


Back to Top
This forum topic has been locked.