One hit wonders: Top 5 openings I have only used ONCE
My most commonly played response to 1.e4 is 1...f5. Seriously. Game Explorer won't tell you that; it's broken (or it was last time I checked). But in my "younger" days, I was something of a maverick when it came to openings - or at least, I thought I was. If being a pawn (or 2, or 3) down with compensation that only exists in the imagination and getting results based on outplaying my opponents from the middlegame onward counts as "maverick". Actually, that might just be the definition.
In my more "mature" days, I must accept that the gambit is unsound. That being said, the above position after move 6 is evaluated at 0.9, which does suggest there IS compensation. However, the computer can also point out a better move for White than accepting the 2nd pawn. Objectively, this opening is indefensible, and Black is playing for mistakes from White. But it could also be argued that it has its uses as a surprise weapon, as I will almost certainly know more theory than my opponent. Which got me thinking: are there any openings I wouldn't play again?
I should also point out that although I have been using sounder openings in response to 1.e4 for many years now, f5 is still technically my most frequent response by dint of the fact that I have constantly switched up which openings I respond with. And I probably will again. Now, the short answer to the question I wondered about above is: Never say never! Fred Defence aside, I have played 5 of the most common openings against 1.e4, and I'm currently not using 4 of them. Since one of the four has yielded some of my best results, and two others I find to be fun, I could see myself going back to them.
So, in terms of finding games to showcase in this article, I asked myself a different question: Are there any openings that I have only played once? Going by the (admittedly unreliable) game explorer, and combining that with my best recollection - with a few caveats like "unrated training games against students don't count" thrown in - it turns out the answer is yes. Yes there are. Quite a few, in fact. Which allows me to do a (cue the music!) list...
Feel free to listen to that as you run through the...
TOP FIVE OPENINGS I HAVE ONLY USED ONCE
In order to rank this, I decided to go by the metric "how likely am I to ever use this opening line again?" - with the "winner" being the one that is most likely to remain a one-hit wonder, probably because it is a suboptimal opening line - but you can see for yourself!
Coming in at Number #5: The Vienna Gambit (Accepted)
I have played the Vienna Opening - and the Vienna Gambit when I got the opportunity - a number of times, so the opening more broadly would be ineligible for the list. However, bearing a striking resemblance to the Master's database, the Vienna Gambit when I've played it has only been accepted once. Not surprising when it is a known error at most levels. Fortunately (for me), the early round of a tournament offers the opportunity to get paired with someone who doesn't know:
I know; I know! This wasn't exactly a great showcase of the prowess of the opening, since there was a disparity in rating, and my opponent didn't know the line. So I'll leave it to one of my students to demonstrate a game where the ratings were closer. It wasn't the Vienna Gambit Accepted per se, but certainly something resembling it, and a good illustration of what happens when Black gets greedy and tries to hold on to the pawns:
At Number #4, the one you have to wait 3 moves for! Trompowsky Attack, 3...e5 gambit
As you may have guessed from the order of merit, those openings "further back" on the list are generally more respectable. The Vienna Gambit Accepted is great for White; the reason I am unlikely to play it again is because the Vienna Game, or the Vienna Gambit Declined, are not so good for White. We go straight from there to FM William Graif's "Deceiver Gambit", which I rolled out one time, as preparation for a specific opponent.
As a person and as an enjoyer of chess content, I like FM William Graif. As a coach who wants chess students to learn good habits - not so much. He's good at what he does, but what he does is score good results with suboptimal openings through a mixture of outplaying the opponents he is better than, and out-prepping those he is not. Younger Alisdair would probably have worshipped him as a God, but I'm (allegedly) grown up now. I mean, I still respect the out-prepping opponents; I doff my cap for that. Still, I can credit him with the above win, so I think it is only fair to give him a shoutout.
At Number #3, Bronze Medal goes to... The Polish Opening!
I forget WHY I was considering this for my repertoire, but I decided to debut this in an online Teams match. If you're not willing to play an opening in a serious competitive game, you shouldn't be using it at all. That does NOT mean you should necessarily do what I do, and immediately start using it in important games! There is something to be said for restricting a new opening to practice games, but that is not my style.
An FM who I generally look to for advice on openings told me there's not much to this one - two moves is his preparation if anyone plays it against him. I'd give it a bit more respect than that, and wanted to at least try it. I chose an opponent who was the same level as me, so that it had a "proper" test. My opponent certainly gave it that, taking an edge from the start, before I worked my way into the game, almost threw it away, but had a good endgame. Anyway, here we go:
At Number #2... just pipping the Polish (somehow)... it's the Nimzo-Larsen Attack!
OK, how did an actually reasonable opening make it into the silver medal position?! Wait, what was my metric again? Am I seriously saying that I'd be LESS likely to play this opening again than the Polish?! Um... yeah. Since I'm not likely to take up either, there's a whole theory devoted to the Nimzo-Larsen, where the Polish is it's own thing. I don't know; I was watching the football when I made the list, Okay? Enjoy the game.
Where would a "Top 5" list be without the customary "honourable mention"? 
Yes, I could just go straight ahead and give you the number 1, but no, let's drag it out. In fact, I was originally just going to do a "Top 6", because who decided that these lists need to be done in 5 or 10 or whatever? Nobody! I didn't sign up to that; did you? The reason I relented and went with formula is because this honourable mention is in a form that the others aren't - yes; I've only played this once... but whether or not I play it again is not in my control; I was playing against it! Nonetheless, the honourable mention goes to: Owen's Defence!
I had a Club tournament match to play - the Bob Dunn Summer (which has previously featured on this blog, but this game comes from the 2023 version). I would be playing White. I looked up my opponent, and saw that he pretty much exclusively played 1...b6 against e4 and d4. Owen's Defence is one of those openings where you can secure an advantage against it, but only if you've done the work. Which of course, I did.
And now, (drumroll...) the opening that I am least likely to play again is....
THE ENGLUND GAMBIT 
Which I only technically sort-of played. As I have previously stated on this blog, I don't play the one-trick-pony line. I got one of my students to show you why. But I did get inspired to play one line that starts out life as an Englund Gambit before becoming something else. It has one major downside, which would put me off playing it again. Here is the game.
It might seem strange to retire an opening when the one time I ventured it was an overwhelming success. This was the quickest win of the lot! But then, the same logic could apply to any of the openings I've showcased. Just because I won, it doesn't make the opening good. I'm not saying I'll never play any of these openings again. I am admitting that I probably shouldn't.
Next week: An OTB recap, as I will have some team match games to show you.
