... By playing 2.c3!!! White does not allow this exchange, . Black then has no answer to white’s superior development and center control, which will ultimately decide the game.
"Objectively, the Alapin System is not that dangerous for Black. ..." - GM Mikhail Golubev (2017)
Actually, play the Alapin against @JustARandomPatzer and I will see how it goes.
Yes by all means please do, and post the game!
I mean you play him
... By playing 2.c3!!! White does not allow this exchange, . Black then has no answer to white’s superior development and center control, which will ultimately decide the game.
"Objectively, the Alapin System is not that dangerous for Black. ..." - GM Mikhail Golubev (2017)
Are you insisting arguing with the idiot for some specific reason?
@pfren, can you please please play him to prove it once and for all?
... By playing 2.c3!!! White does not allow this exchange, . Black then has no answer to white’s superior development and center control, which will ultimately decide the game.
"Objectively, the Alapin System is not that dangerous for Black. ..." - GM Mikhail Golubev (2017)
Are you insisting arguing with the idiot for some specific reason?
Often, opening books have the Alapin as just a sidenote, dismissing it and realized by the openings true danger:
So you two are arguing against a lot of masters who made those books? Play @pfren or @JustARandomPatzer to prove the Alapin!
... By playing 2.c3!!! White does not allow this exchange, . Black then has no answer to white’s superior development and center control, which will ultimately decide the game.
"Objectively, the Alapin System is not that dangerous for Black. ..." - GM Mikhail Golubev (2017)
Are you insisting arguing with the idiot for some specific reason?
I’m curious as to what percentage of Pfren’s posts on this thread are to call me an idiot. I’d say at least 80%
Here’s my most recent 1 minute no increment game. Black foolishly tried the Sicilian and as always white’s superior development and center control led to an unstoppable attack on the black king.
BULLET????????
Play 10 min blitz or 5 min blitz! Bullet is not real chess anyways!
Here’s my most recent 1 minute no increment game. Black foolishly tried the Sicilian and as always white’s superior development and center control led to an unstoppable attack on the black king.
BULLET????????
Play 10 min blitz or 5 min blitz! Bullet is not real chess anyways!
Bullet is chess!
You can see how you can win in 4 moves!! 
Oh, wait, time stamp showed that I beat an opponent in 1 second!!
I think it is the fastest ever game available in any type of game.
It is chess, but it is too fast to really think
Depends on how you trained!
Here is another game I played today,
Analysis showed that I had only 1 inaccuracy in bullet, which is good!
Depends on positon, if it is simple and straight forward, 1 min bullet is more than enough to play a very good game.
It is chess, but it is too fast to really think
Depends on how you trained!
Here is another game I played today,
Analysis showed that I had only 1 inaccuracy in bullet, which is good!
Depends on positon, if it is simple and straight forward, 1 min bullet is more than enough to play a very good game.
"the plane, the plane"
"the plane, the plane"
It is chess, but it is too fast to really think
Depends on how you trained!
Here is another game I played today,
Analysis showed that I had only 1 inaccuracy in bullet, which is good!
Depends on positon, if it is simple and straight forward, 1 min bullet is more than enough to play a very good game.
If that game is too short, here is a longer game,
I mean, in bullet, good players can play good game, but there is a high chance of blunders though.
3 inaccurancies, whole game!
I onced played a bunch of 3 sec/1 sec bullet on a website
And I won most of them via premove
Attention chess.com members something truly alarming has been brought to my attention and I need your help in understanding it.
As we all know, Semyon Alapin is without a doubt the greatest opening theoretician of all time. This is a man who was able to refute the Sicilian over a century before I was able to vindicate his idea with a formal proof showing the Alapin defeats the Sicilian by force.
So when I look at the other opening that bears his name.
1. e4 e5
2. Ne2
I can’t help but be confused. What does this Ne2 move accomplish? Why would someone as brilliant as Semyon Alapin endorse such a counterintuitive move? Unfortunately I’m not smart enough to answer this question myself, so I must pose this question to the chess.com community as a whole, and see if we can figure out what brilliant unorthodox logic must be behind this move.
I onced played a bunch of 3 sec/1 sec bullet on a website
And I won most of them via premove
Evidence?
I have never seen people playing less than 15 secs or 10+1 seconds.
Are you chessboy or big talk boy?
... over a century before I was able to vindicate his idea with a formal proof showing the Alapin defeats the Sicilian by force. ...
"... U showed your own analysis, with some nonsense and bad moves from black which don't prove anything.
U just proved u lack some objectivity and skill to assess moves/positions." - IM pouncin (September 26, 2018)
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/a-bust-to-the-sicilian-defense?page=12
Kim Jong Un should be ruling North Korea since the majority of its people supposedly think so.
See what happened?
2. c3 is just a move, probably a little harmless theoretically as black has multiple options which come close to objective equality, but it's just a game, and there's nothing wrong with someone who plays it. Someone else on this site, I think it was Alex Richter maybe, made the point that after 1. e4 c5, 2. c3 is funny in the sense that it more-or-less cancels out the idea of black's previous move and reinstates the exact same threat which existed after white's previous move. This isn't to argue that there's anything special about the c3 Sicilian...
And if there's a true advantage for white vs the Sicilian it lies in the Open Sicilians or the Bb5 sidelines, where of course the real debates are had
Interesting, but mostly inaccurate.
I said it in the original post and I’ll say it again here. The move c5 violates every opening principle. It fails to develop a piece, fails to put a pawn in the center and fails to open a bishop for development. Now the only reason anyone ever played c5 is that in order for white to open the position up and take advantage of his superior development and center control he must trade his d pawn for blacks c pawn. This small amount of compensation is enough for black to hold. By playing 2.c3!!! White does not allow this exchange, . Black then has no answer to white’s superior development and center control, which will ultimately decide the game.
so does c3. What does c3 do? block a knights natral square, fails to get a piece into the center and such. You are arguing for what you you arguing against.
Actually, play the Alapin against @JustARandomPatzer and I will see how it goes.
Yes by all means please do, and post the game!