14803 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Backgammon, Yatzy, and more!
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
Actually IM pfren, I am slightly curious of the c3 move by white. 1.e4 e5 2.Qh5 Nc6 3.Bc4 g6 4.Qf3 Nf6 5.c3!? could you give me some lines for good play by black? Thanks.
If you are interested in the Parham please analyze at a different forum.
We had a forum for that, but that got closed down because you're not allowed to share ideas on this site.
5...Bh6!? followed by Na5 looks strong for Black.
@Gavinator, That is not true. There was to much swearing on that forum.
The recipe against 5.c3 is the same as the one against 5.Ne2 (which is surely enough more sound): 5...Na5!, or 5...Bg7 6.d3 Na5! (it does not make much differene, but since 5.c3 is nondeveloping and colourlsess 5...Bg7 may be more exact- I really don't know, or bother knowing).
The whole opening is rubbish, and that is that.
The move suggested by CHCL (5...Bh6!?) is definitely not something I would consider playing OTB, but on second thoughts it's not bad at at all. It's certainly worth an outing- whenever you find an idiot that plays the Parham, that is...
Lol that is definetly not true. Usually when people have different ideas people tell them they suck and that's it. I tried to be helpful by posting sample games, lines, and also talking about players who have played this, so therefore the thread was closed. There's swearing on this thread, it's not closed, there was a thread a while back where some creepy guy was hitting on a 15 year old girl, that's not closed. Mine just involved a different idea.
You wern't the main reason that it was closed.
I know that. Creativity is.
Creativity- no. Stupidity and endless spamming- yes.
Thank you for those lines, IM. I was just a bit curious (I don't usually play ...e5 anymore). But useful to remember! Thanks!
That's funny, Andrew Martin didn't seem to think it was that stupid. Here's a quote from him "This opening is definetly much better than its reputation".
It's just that everyone on here is so unwilling to look at new ideas, they just immediately say its bad, they won't even look at it, and say "Everyone HAS to use the same thing". There's a word for that, it's called communism.
Some of my closest friends have been communists. None of them ever brought their queens out too early.
Everyone has to use the same thing
A few pros played as black 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f6
like Bill Wall.
There are plenty of innovative players. Tony Miles played 1...a6.
It just isn't usually played because it is worse.
No it's usually not played becasue it's overlooked. Look at whatupyodog, he got banned because he did so good with it.
But that's not the Parham. The point of it, other than winning rooks, scholar's mates, and kiddie countergambit, is that g6 is a bad move. That's what let's you pin, and let's you win.
He also had another video showing how the Parham is overlooked by many of the trolls on here. And yeah you should probably head out, last time you did a move thing it didn't work out so hot for you. h6 is just weak, FYI.
So, 1.e4 Nf6 2.Qh5 Nxh5 with a slight Black advantage puts the Parham into a somewhat dubious state. Case closed.
Well he actually said it was much better than his reputation, and you can't seem to fight it yourself, so please don't criticize it. That's like the fat kid saying doing push-ups are easy when he can't do one himself.
again the evidence fails to support your worship of the 2. Qh5 line.
The evidence quoted is that Nakamura played it several years ago in some blitz games online, poor evidence! Nakamura trotted it out in two OTB games and drew one and lost one. But wait you said he made a mistake in the middlegame or he would have been better. EXACTLY! one of the most talented players in the world missed the right ideas because he was challenged by his opponent and himself and couldnt find the right plan. THe other games are by weak players or won from bad positions because of an overt blunder. games between 2000 players dont count as theory, sorry. NO its not refuted but if black plays sensible moves they equalized fairly easily and can challenge white in the middlegame, not something white should be striving for. I watched Gata Kamsky play blitz when he was making his comeback and it was amazing,... for fun he played Na3 and Nh3 against anything black played,... and won against strong opposition. Just because you see GMs play something in blitz does not validate it.Finally IM Martin is a funny guy and part of his JOB is to sell videos. Do you think he is going to say this is garbage and there is better things to play and then sell you the video? He has a captive audience that eats up stuff because it fits an emotional desire to win fast and easily and trick your opponent.
John Nunn talked about these types of openings in his Practical chess book and gives a break down of how to show the problems with anyone supporting something that is universally considered second rate
You can argue that its equal BUT it is NOT as good as the other mainline openings such as the Italian, ruy lopez, queens gambit, Kings gambit etc. Its not! period! and you as a 1300-1500 player arguing with IM and players that are 100's of points stronger than you make you look like a child.
We arent close minded about new ideas. The Lasker-Pelikin was under a theoetical cloud (read Fine's ideas behind the chess openings to see the 'refutation') until Sveshnikov showed some new ideas and PROVED them in GAMES against strong MASTER (IM/GM) level opposition. Kramnik picked it up giving it the final seal of approval. He also did the same with the Berlin defense. Kasparov revived the Scotch and Evans Gambit.
Morozevich revived the Albin and some other side lines as well.
The thing your lacking is PROOF! blitz games arent proof. A 1900 "Master" playing it and preaching it to his students doesnt validate it either. Trust me when I say that If it was valid you would see it more, Players today are looking for surprise weapons to take players out of book yet you havent seen this idea played in a serious game .,...
Somepeople refuse to acknowledge the evidence presented to them no matter what it is. There are people who believe the world is flat, that noone has visted the moon, that global warming doesnt exist ,GW Bush had a brain and the "parham" is a valid attempt to win.
Willie Nelson v Ray Charles
by AussieRookie a few minutes ago
Chess legends. Where would be Carlson's position in a list?
by Boris_McQueen a few minutes ago
White to move and win
by n9531l 3 minutes ago
Analysis board - how do I understand it?
by MTCicero2 4 minutes ago
8/26/2016 - Kouatly - Tsheshkovsky, Hoogovens 1988
by Arisktotle 6 minutes ago
All The Reasons We Hate V3!
by isaacnewt 6 minutes ago
Do You Think That Chess and Bowling Are Related?
by AussieRookie 8 minutes ago
If You Could Go to Dinner with Any Chess Player, Who'd You Pick?
by stuzzicadenti 10 minutes ago
Vintage 1940's English Made Set Possibly Jaques?
by goodknightmike 10 minutes ago
by IMperf_X_ion00 11 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2016 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!