Is anything better for me than the Parham?

be specific next time

you are the one who looks like a retard here

damn u are dumb.

really we are heading for that in our game, so unless you have something up your sleve, I have at least equality.

damn is in the bible though

Thinking you are a follower of the bible, you would respect the orgin of the word.

unfortunately the gavinator is right, just like the guy who killed a man with the jawbone of an ***

anyway in my line this is what the gavinator came up with and again I was materialistic and lost

Why move that Knight to a5 in the first place? As black, I would play Bg7, d6 (yes, I like it. Prepares Bg4) Qe7 (possibly) and 0-0 with an ok game

the one percent fire and brimstone preacher says that if you don't fear the Lord, then your soul will be d***** for all eternity. but then again so is H*** if used correctly as the place where evil people go.

anyway lets not get into lexicography, lets stick with chess.

Na5 looks very odd if you're not going to take the bishop.  After simply 10.Ba2 black's development doesn't look very smooth, not that  he's losing or anything.

Looks like you can't wait to join your buddy on the ban list.  When you get over how awesome winning knight forks on move 10 are, maybe you'll be a little more appreciative of the depth the game offers, and of those who enjoy learning about it.

+1

Who needs debth when I can win on move 10? It's a game, the goal is to win. I don't need to play the ruy-lopez crap when I can win on move 10. Enough said.

honestly I screwed up in both games, after 5:00 eastern my chess degrades horendously, also I could probably beat you because overall my game is better, I just screwed up and wasn't paying attention, something that happens a lot I was also to materialistic, and was quite happy to take the free Bishop. anyway I like this game, and am pretty good, I learned that I had a complete advantage in my KG game until I started blundering like crazy( from about move 17 onward) and I could have had an advantage in the parham game if I ignored the bishop and played Bb7 at move 10. anyway, I would like it if you would not call us communists, because I believe firmly in the constitution, I only was tired of being told to f ourselves and other things of that nature. not because I have a bias against better players, I have lost to manny people who were much better than me, but they were always respectful about it, and gave me a free lesson in a way, and even a post mortem, also I could probably beat you but you won't accept a challange. plus since I didn't use an engine in either of those games, and since i didnt need an engine to get a winning position against a USCF 2000 (whatup- though judging by his play I am highly suspicious of that) why would I need one against you.

Lol how can you still go on about this?? You get crushed when using the KG, and get crushed against the Parham, but you STILL call KG good and Parham bad. HOW??? I mean are you like retarted? The object of chess is to WIN, not to LOSE, do you know the rules?

You can only win on move 10 when you are playing complete nubs, or they make a lucky blunder. Try playing higher rated players in 90 minute or 2 hour games over the board like I do. The chances of winning on move ten are slim unless you are a 2000+ playing an U1500. Even I, a 1500 rated player, can survive 30 - 60 moves against most GM's. Also, there is no way whatupyodog was 2000 USCF, that's a complete lie. At best he was 200.

I won't lose to them THE GAVINATOR, challenge me.

If you can get positions you're familiar with, and on top of it reach them with no disadvantage, then that's worth a lot.  Especially among amateurs if you're familiar with the standard type moves and they're not, it may be = but in practical terms you're almost definitely ahead.  In this case the Pharem (or any opening you take the time to play often and study) will do very well for you.

Add to this low rated players (like 99% of chess.com) arguing and playing games over theoretical advantage stuff is pretty silly, I think we all know that.  You may even call it immature.  But slamming other players just because you beat them has got to be 10x worse.  IMO anyway, one of the universal chess lessons is humility, because even our wins contain mistakes, and there's always someone better than we are.

He's actually around 1750, and here's my thing. Against players who truly know what they're doing (I'd say USCF 1500+?), you're not going to get a material advantage in the first 10 moves. But that's no matter what you're doing. So you're going to have to win on tactics, and endgame, if it comes to it. So if I'm not going to gain an advantage in the opening, why not play an opening that could give me a huge advantage? Most people aren't booked on it, and could crack under pressure.

yes I know the rules, call anyone another name, and I will report you,

I had a winning position at move 16. then started blundering horibly the next move. the other game was a complete oversight, I admit that, I hope you take into account that I have some 500 years of research on my side and all you have is 20someodd and a comment that said it was playable. I honestly think that 500 years wins out along with spassky Fischer, anderssen, Morphy, and many others. spassky and fischer could probably beat the tar out of naka. anyway, I am pretty sure I could beat you with the KG as white and against the parham as black BARRING OVERSIGHTS, because those are not cause by the opening, those are just oversights.