So as a huge fan of the black side of 1.e4 e5 im considering playing the black side when im white with the waitingmove 1.a3 often followed by e5 2.e4. I will not meet a reversed ruy lopez since i have a pawn at a3 stopping the lopezbishop and in the italian a3 is useful anyway. Against others im not 100% sure. One thing is After 1.a3 d5 im not sure what reversed queenpawnopening is best with a3 inserted. Any suggestions?

its rubbish

---

Try the Double Reversed Triple Accelerated Poisoned Nimzo Dragon! It always works for Us.  >:[

---

And just when I was thinking such a thing wasn't possible...

I dont see whats so boring with e4e5. When you play that white plays alot of sharp openings. You got the kings gambit, evans gambit, two knights defence, ponsiani and alot more!

You're going to get reversed Scotch games where the move a3/a6 is useless.

---

Who said it was boring?  I think the operative word is more like "onerous."

In order to justify 1. a3, black must play into what you want.  What if black plays in such a way that white doesn't want the pawn on a3?  Why not start with 1. e4 and play a3 later if it makes sense?  1. e4 is a good move because it puts pressure on the center and opens up lines for your Bf1 and queen and provide the Ng1 with another square to move to.  What does 1. a3 do, except with the hope that black will give white a reason to make the move?

I'm going to ask you a very simple question:why are you playing a3? Why are you not grabbing centre space, supporting a centre pawn or developing a piece?

Andy: ah ok sorry about that. I like 1...e5 because i feel i learn so much from studying it and its also the opening i score best with. The moves seems relatively logical and easy to find Helltank read my first post:) Bsrasmus:i agree that 1.e4 is better. I just like beeing on the black side of 1.e4 systems. I dont know how black can exploit .a3 better than punishing whites lack of space and taking the center himself giving me what i want. Also im not sure if sicilianplayers want to play a "english" with c5

There are better ways. For example you could play 1.e4 e5 2.d3 and play this way against almost anything Black does.

I don't see how a3 can be useful against any of those moves. Even beginners who're obsessed with the power of the rook lift play a4.

I would have thought that if you enjoy and are knowledgeable at playing the black side of e5/e5 openings that would automatically infer that you would have a good knowledge of the white side strategies of the same e4/e5 openings. My suggestion would be that 1.a3 is very passive, too passive in my book. If you play that regularly people will come to expect it and you will find yourself frustrated by them playing lines where a3 is a wasted move. If you want "quieter" openings then why not try 1.d4 as white?

I am not sure why there is all these things against 1.a3.  I mean, isn't it equivalent to playing black except with a6 included?  Unless black is already in trouble at the initial position, I don't think there really is anything wrong with it.  It may not have any value against some responses, but is it at a disadvantage against a certain setup?  I doubt it.

As the great chess author and international master Jeremy Silman once wrote in his book, you should always reply to any perceived black threat with "Rubbish!", especially when the threat itself is sort of vague. 1.a3 does prevent Nb4, but it throws away White's precious extra tempo. 

In fact, he gave an example of a game in which his student played an online game of chess, and his opponent actually played h3 to prevent Ng4. Silman wrote that it was a bad move which loses the initiative, and I'm forced to agree there. 

The Ruy Lopez IS an annoying opening which many players hate to play against, but it's not worth a tempo. And what if your opponent decides to play some other opening other than Nb4 or the Ruy Lopez? Now you've wasted a move and created a possible infiltration point for a bishop at h2!

GM Eric Prie (long time writer of the "d-pawn specials" section of Chesspublishing) has experimented with 1.d4 d5 2.a3. If black plays ...c5 in queen's gambit style, white may be able to grab the pawn and keep it. Also some discussion here: http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1210721736

I'm tempted to start playing it myself :-)

Aido if more people had played 1...e5 i would have played 1.e4 with no exeption:)

---

Have any GMs started REGULARLY ADOPTING it?

No?

Then I'm not going to play such a passive and somewhat dubious move until a GM does analysis of the move and shows that you can win with it in tournament play.