Ruy Lopez

A great opening, I play it a lot with the white pieces.

Here is an explanation of the basic ideas: http://www.mychessblog.com/ruy-lopez-opening-basic-moves/

On Wikipedia you can find an overall explanation of the opening: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruy_Lopez

And here you can find more: http://homepage.ntlworld.com/adam.bozon/ruylopez.htm

Not that this is likely to help you very much, but almost all double KP openings except the Ruy and KG have been played and analyzed almost to death and most of them either give Black easy equality - or an edge - except for the RL which often gives White an annoyingly persistent initiative or the KG which is still double-edged, as opposed to being inferior for White.

The RL here utilizes several opening principles advocated by Dr Lasker (in Common Sense in Chess) many other great players - such as developing a Kt before the Bishop, developing the K-side ahead of the Q-side and castling early.

Also the RL has many many variations (and sub-variations) like other popular openings (Sicilian Defense, QGD to name a few) which allows both White and Black to steer the game into open, semi-open or closed positions; and into tactical or positional games. Openings such as the Two Kts Game, Three Kts Game and Four Kts Game are sound but much less intricate which is a plus and a minus - but a real plus if you're trying to learn an opening and all it's major lines!

Still, I wouldn't worry about why the RL is  played - if you don't "get it" yet concentrate on whatever you've been playing as White in Double KP Openings - Italian Game, Ponziani, Four Kts or whatever; most double KP Openings are fine for amateurs - providing they have a clue when they play them of course!

Chess is a draw, main line openings don't lead to a theoretical advantage for White. They may be easier to play for white or give a bit of initiative for a while, but all the big main lines in chess lead to equality with best play by black.

 thanks

I aways get the feeling it would be stronger for black to develop a piece on move three instead of a6 this move seems almost to refute the rule develop as fast as possible. But then Morphy played it so it must be ok.

The other puzzling thing is why not drive the bishop right away with b4 after a6? also allowing black to develop his bishop on b7.

This move Bb5 is surely weaker than Bb4 which focuses whites bishop on f7. It also exposes the bishop to immediate attack.

 hi

advantage for black? what is this line?

Join my thematic tournanment about ruy lopez(spanish opening) if you dare ;) :P at this link : http://www.chess.com/tournament/spanish-opening-ruy-lopez-openampfast-tournament

3...a6 is played to to allow Black the option of quickly breaking the pin on his c6 Knight.  The only variations where Black doesn't benefit from ...a6 are those variations where the bishop is immediate attacked on b5 such as Birds defense, the Schliemann, and the Berlin Wall.

one of the best openings with e4,e5

Strange that this poster would write so passionately on the topic of refraining from posting rubbish when you don't know what you're talking about, only to then declare the KG "refuted".

Maybe noone told Spassky the KG was refuted and thats why he has such a great record with it from the white side ?  

17 wins, 1 loss and 12 draws with a refuted opening is astounding isnt it !? 

You are advocating resurrecting old threads?  That is generally considered to be trolling.

i think the problem with the kings gambit is

1) black has many different answers to it

2)just about all the answers are completely playable for black so white has some work to do. often if white doesnt find the right moves he goes down in flames. i think David Pruess on this site said something like "you are gonna make a difficult position for both you and your opponent and your opponent is gonna do more mistakes than you

I tend to think of the King's Gambit as a shadowy version of the London System.

The London isn't refuted, but probably leads to a nearly equal middle game in a number of lines.  The major factor in its favor being that the lines are so easy for white to play that it becomes an excellent practical choice over the board.

The King's gambit isn't refuted, but probalby leads to a nearly equal middle game in a number of lines.  The major factor AGAINST it being that the lines are so HARD for white to play that it becomes a very difficult practical choice over the board.

But theoretically speaking, I believe it's holding up fine.

This makes me want to play it. :)

It seems to me that black can gain a distinct advantage if instead of 3 a6 he simply plays 3)---  Bc5. Especially as we know white cannot gain a pawn by

3)---Bc5  4) BxN d7xB  5) Nxe5 Qd4  This is a sound developing move which surely give at least equality.

Below ELO 2600 or so, nothing is refuted.