18094 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!
i mean so bad that they are absolutly not playable
and yeah the albins countergambit it might be bad i dont know, but its fun if white plays badly you look like a genius.
This is exactly the reason of all the openings mentioned, and also the reason why you should not play them.
but i dont think albins countergambit is that easy to refute.
but anyway even if it is, i just like the crazyness of it, even if its bad it is at least somehow very imaginativ in my opinion.
5.a3 is pretty easy to remember. I won't call it a refutation. It's not outright won for White yet, but it sucks a lot of fun out of the Albin for Black.
well i heard an im say he hates the albin and has problems with it. I cant imagine he would not remember a3 on move 5.
not to mention the im that plays the albin against him in a tournament...
but yeah maybe you are right, just because some are ims they ofc can still be incorrect sometimes. i havent checked it and i dont play it myself.
I just like the idea of the opening because it seems so counter intuitive to play that moves. I mean seriously, when would you ever come up with such moves?? i
For ranking these openings from worst to playable:
1.Englund Gambit (Horrible)
2.Halloween Gambit (Terrible)
3.Cochrane Gambit (Unfathomable)
4.Parham Attack (Good for schoolkids...)
5.Albin Gambit (Played it once and got a really interesting game out of it)
6.Budapest Gambit (I believe this is played most in professional games)
7.Traxler Counter gambit (I've personally won loads of games with this)
But what about weird openings such as the Sodium attack and Van't Krujis Bouncing Bishop opening? I believe that can be easily countered.
So... assuming Black plays maybe 6.Bd6 instead of that blunder, Black's better developed. White's Queen is out of the action and his other pieces are doing nothing. Meanwhile Black's bishops are activated, his knights are out, his rook can be placed on the f-file. He's ready to rock and roll. And white has to spend further moves just to keep his queen from being lost.I don't know much about this opening though. Maybe White can answer all of those challenges, and is in fact won. Regardless, I don't think Black will give White a chance to ever play this opening, because 2...d5 has surely got to be better than 2...b5, kicking away the bishop and taking the center.It's a clever attack, and the principle behind it appears in other openings like the Queen's gambit or the old Benoni--if someone tries to take that c pawn and hang on to it, they could lose a rook. If you want to try a really offbeat out-there opening you could give the Orangutan a look.
Why would white play 1.e3? Check any DB and you'll be hard pressed to find a reply for black that doesn't score better. I mean, we're talking the first move here, and black is statistically better with about half a dozen choices!? Still, the move does have it's adherents. And on the club level, it usually transposes to something like an English or even Bird's Opening. So white can do ok with it. But trying 1.e3 in the hopes that your opponent finds the lemon 2...b5 is ridiculous.
now you kidding, you cant seriously say e3 is a bad move, you still could play d4 afterwards or f4 or even as you mentioned c4.
e3 as a first move is definitely bad, look at the databases, as a second or third move or whatever it's fine but as a first it's too passive
I didn't say it's a bad move....... but then again, I didn't say it's a good move, either. I just think it's questionable as a first move. But it does transpose rather easily to a lot of other lines, so most of the times I guess white can do alright with it. Maybe it's good for unnerving an opponent, or fool them into thinking you've gone crazy. Hey, whatever works!
1.e3 is a bad move, especially if you intend to play 2.d4 whatever your opponent plays, why not play 1.d4 ? At least you haven't trapped your Bc1.
Maybe not as bad as 1.f3, but still bad.
Against 1.e3 I simply answer 1...d5 and let my opponent wonder why he has played this move :
After 2.d4 the position is the same as 1.d4 d5 2.e3 but none sane would play 2.e3 in that line.
After 2.c4, already 2...dxc4 3.Bxc4 e5 is a good game for Black.
After 2.f4 (maybe the best from the first move), Black has to be careful not to be overambitious in the center or he falls back in the lines of the Dutch with one less tempo, but otherwise he is fine. For instance ...Nf6, ...g6 and ...Bg7 and if White stonewalls by d4 just jump at the outpost e4.
irontiger i think im missing something, yeah it might be pretty embaressing to ask but i do it anyway. wouldnt 2 e3 just transpose later to other regular d4 lines or can black really take advantage of that move?
No, it does not transpose, because your bishop on c1 is now blocked by the pawn. You won't be able to play it to g5 for instance (his usual square in the 1.d4 d5 games). So yes, Black can take advantadge of it. Maybe the game is just equal after that, but White who has problems with his bishop instead of White in the regular lines, so it is much easier to play for Black.
yes you are right i totally forgot bishop g5, but i guess there are also lines without it and e4 will be played later anyway
im just asking out curiosity now, i totally forgot about bishop g5 but i imagine an entire openings as big as those d4 openings would not necessarily depend on that move to be played with advantage, even so ofc bishop g5 helps e4 i guess.
anway thanks for the help
You really have seen e4 played before the endgame in many games that began by 1.d4 d5 ? Not me. And anyways, if ever you want to play the pawn on e4, why do it in two moves (e2-e3 and then e3-e4) ?
I agree trapping the bishop is not so terrible, and there are ways around. But that totally ruins the first move advantadge, at least. It is not because it is tiny that you should renounce to it as soon as move 2 when you can do otherwise.
"Titled Tuesday! Host IM Danny Rensch!"
8/4/2015 - Classic King Hunt
by reighly1724 a few minutes ago
This is why I don't play chess
by uwinagain 3 minutes ago
Why did Fischer condemn 1. d4 ?
by JeanMichelJamJar 3 minutes ago
Hurt/Heal Top Non-World Champions
by Monarch1066 4 minutes ago
Do I have to buy Fritz every time a new one comes out?
by Crappov 4 minutes ago
Italian game, Bird's attack
by Fiveofswords 6 minutes ago
Spanish Chess Pieces
by goodknightmike 7 minutes ago
online rating much lower than uscf rating
by AIM-AceMove 10 minutes ago
Bobby Fischer Lacked Creativity ?....How Dare Me !
by JeanMichelJamJar 11 minutes ago
Review: GM Pavasovic chess set by Noj Slovenia
by cgrau 17 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!