2.Qh5 refuted?

Sort:
LAexpress12
Ziryab wrote:

I play the line, but only in blitz so far. Nakamura plays it against GMs. I would probably play it except that I rarely play 1.e4 in serious tournament games. 1.d4 is superior.


agreed. who needs to study against qh5 when white should be playing 1. d4, i mean really.

ozzie_c_cobblepot

Refuted includes context. Sometimes, in a contested line, white has an "unclear" attack (which means that not enough analysis has been done yet). After some time, if it is discovered that black can get a perpetual check in a forcing line, then the attack is "refuted", in the sense that it is refuted as a serious try for an advantage.

Sure, I would still play the attack against a GM, but that's more context.

rigamagician

As Savielly Tartakower used to say, as long as an opening is considered dubious, it should be playable.