Aggressive Response to 4...Nf6 in the Scotch

That's cuz a6 is dumb, Qh5 has merit. There's absolutely no purpose in doing a6 except to troll, Qh5 is an attack, and it's just overlooked for bringing the queen out early. There's no similarity.

yes there is, they were both played by world class players for thier time, the major diffences are Tony Miles actually beat Karpov with it, Naka lost a game with his and drew another to people rated much lower than him. Miles beat the WC with it.

I don't care about what the world class players did, look at the moves. a6 kills time, Qh5 is an attack. How are you all so dull?

However, this might be a shock to the modern.

1.e4 g6 Qh5!!

and black, if he wants to accept the sacrifice will need to accept doubled, ugly, issolated h pawns and a horrid kingside pawn construction just for one tiny queen.

But back to topic, e4 e5 qh5 nc6 qxf7 is ok for 1 min games, but nonsense for real chess. I would accept playing the parham in fast time controls, but I would rather play 1. a3 for regular chess, where I just lose one move instead of two. (1.e4 e5 2.Qh5 Nc6 3.Qd1! [white decides to be smart])

I am just using evidence, like you want us too, or do you want us to prove your opening is best, well that isn't going to happen anytime soon, there is a reason Parham only got to 2100, there is a reason Naka never had a positive OTB result under classical time controls, there is a reason why this is never seen in serious games between 2600+'s, its because the Parham is not the best opening, there is a reason why the highest rated player to use the KG was 2813 if I remember correctly, and his name was Carlsen. The KG is sound, the Parham Not.

The kings gambit is not 100% sound cuz some lines in the kings knight gambit are refuted.

in practical play maybe, but the entire thing is sound, I mean if White doesnt go overboard, the Gambit is sound. Bc4 is the line I play because it works

It is funny how you are showing us your masterpiece and how you give us an example in a heavily lost game. If it was OTB i have no brightest idea how this might happened

Karpov was beaten by a6 herp derp berp lerp.

are you serious?

rxf2 and nxc7 can win material back.

it was otb.

geez.

Having won the piece back and gotten some material to go with it. Am I missing something?

Your line is flawed, Kolegamackaa: 3.Rxf2 Qxf2 4.Nxc7 Kf8 5.Nxa8 ef4 6.Qf1! fg3 7.Qxf2 gf2 8.Bf1 Nb4!? 9.Kg2 Nxd3 10.Nb6 and white is much better (probably winning by force).

Yep, true, he missed a large advantage (I wouldn't say "a forced win"), but since he lost, all credits should be attributed to Black's weird opening. Right?

I used the a6 argument in the same way the nonrussian uses his silly nakamura argument

did you know that according to that site that the mods will remove the name of on this site, thier opening analysis tool calls 2. Qh5 the Patzer Opening

Or he can just play 5. Ne2 and win. 1400's on chesscube are like 1100's here, chesscube is usually like 300 inflated from this site.

Example:

your opponent blundered

also My line doesn't loose material.

But in your line black can only use rook and night while white uses everything to destroy kingside and black can do nothing about it.

I hate it when bad people try to refute the parham. It's so annoying.

You're making me defend a line which I find horrible, stop giving bad refutation attempts, jetfighter.

geh, who*
Pulling another allnighter, final exams~

edit edit: you know what, even I, the person who fears attacking the most and has sadly drawn countless games because I sometimes refuse to take the initiative would most likely go for the h4-h5 plan instead. I'm pretty sure I could beat a grandmaster in that position by doing that. Not that it's saying much since it is a lost position after all.

''black is won''

WHY DO YOU WRITE YOUR POSTS?! gah!