Agressive Opening Against 1. e4 as Black

Ba4. With the same idea. 

How about the Kings Indian Defense....I am using it always as black against e4....and Grunfeld against d4....

hifive, pat. I do GF defense 2 in OTB.

Now 11...Bxc3, NOT 11...b5, as you propose.  Boy you like to make weak moves for Black.  Of course if you always decide to play weak moves for Black, White's going to look like he wins by force from move 1.

After 12.bxc3, I personally would probably play 12...Kh8, but 12...Be6 is just as good for Black.

Of course, I myself would never reach this position, even though it's perfectly fine for Black, because I play 4...Nd4 against the Spanish Four Knights, not 4...Bb4 (strictly a matter of taste).

Of course, the fact that your USCF rating is 849 and mine is 2185 also says a lot about which one to believe.  No wonder you like to give Black weak moves like 9...Ng6 and 11...b5.

Here are a few tips that may avoid future embarassment when you see a mystifying move in the opening recommended by a player with a decent rating (i.e. 2099 Online Chess).

7...Ne7 is a trendy move that was recently recommended in the book Open Games for Black by Lysyj and Ovetchkin. You may not know this or have the book, but here are a few things you can do:

1) Look in a database.

Checking the position in the online Chessbase database at move 7, you see there are 262 games with 7...Ne7 and it is the second most popular move. Now check the ratings by Black and arrange by top Elo. Now check the year. If you check games after the year 2010, you will see 7...Ne7 is favored by top players by a large margin. A few examples of strong players with the Black pieces: Aronian, Mamedyarov, Ponomariov, Morozevich, Sargissian, Harikrishna, etc.

Hopefully you have some objectivity to pause for deeper reflection at this point before dismissing the move as a beginner's mistake.

2) Check the statistics and games with your objection to the move.

If you look at the continuation 8.Bxf6 gxf6 9.Nh4, there are 37 games and White is scoring a lousy 33.8%. Hmm...

You can also look at examples by strong players as Black against this continuation. You could look at games by GMs Hammer, Zhou, and Gupta, or you could go back in time and take a look at games by Smyslov, Euwe, Janowski, and Spielmann. Take your pick.

3) Check your analysis with an engine.

I'll show an example of one line where White ends up worse if he continues to play as though he is better:

7...Ne7 may seem like a strange move at first, but hopefully these steps will yield more light to its logic. Its concept is not so dissimilar to some ideas in the Sveshnikov where Black willingly allows his structure to be wrecked by Bxf6 gxf6 in return for dynamic compensation often associated with the f5 break.

Oh really? Proves you are even more like an hypocrite.

FYI, my USCF rating is now 1390, I didn't update it.

And fine, I am wrong, but does it give you the right to embarass yourself with your hypocrisy.

where do you guys find all these prenium features?

As you play the King's Gambit on white - how about the Colorado Gambit

(1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 f5)? The German player Ilja Schneider (rating about 2500)

is a specialist of that gambit. By the way - if you like this gambit you

must also like the normal lines of the Nimzowitsch Defence after

1.e4 Nc6 2.d4.

You don't update your USCF rating, the USCF updates it.  You are 849 based on 24 games.

See for yourself:

http://www.uschess.org/component/option,com_wrapper/Itemid,181/

Search for USCF ID 14705451

And clearly you have no clue what hypocrisy (or a hypocrite) is.  It's a person that acts in contradiction to their own stated feelings or beliefs.  For example, if a woman were to go around town shouting how sinful abortion is, and then she proceeds to go and get an abortion herself!

pfren,  what do you think about the main line with 7.f3 in latvian gambit,  is enoough to keep the advantage easily? 

7.f3 is supposed to be the best line for White.  The thing that makes some people skeptical about it is that it doesn't just blow Black right off the board, which some amateur players get the idea "Oh, it's the Latvian, I must blow Black off the board as quickly as humanly possible", rather than just simply taking the large positional advantage and being content with that.

If you want the greatest theoretical advantage, play 3.Nxe5 and 7.f3.  If you want to blow Black off the board, give 3.Bc4 a whirl, but if Black defends flawlessly, White's advantage is gone.  Over the board, 3.Bc4 can often work, but don't try it in Correspondence.  Black will likely know what he's doing, and you'll end up in a draw.

Just stop arguing like little kids. Only those respond to stupid comments like Maybe made.

If you are very lazy player 1.e4 e6 2.d4 a6?! 3.Nf3 b5.

Tony Mile once beat Karpov with this defense.

Yeah, that's one little side-effect of those "agressive" openings as Black.

My problem with the sicilian was its popularity .  When I played only 1 e4 as white ( 2 decades ) about 50% of my opponents would play a sicilian . Since the sicilian was my choice as black against 1 e4 as well it meant well over 50% of my games were sicilians , for about 2 decades . To combat this I added  1 d4  as white and added the french as black to my repertoire .  This solved the sicilian problem for me . 

Laugh Out Loud!

This is what it has come down to?

Of course they come from results. How would you compute such a probability?

If you like statistics, here is one:1.Nh3 scores way, way better than 1.e4 per chess.com's database. The conclusion is obvious.

I've got two words for you:  UTTER CRAP!

There is no way in hell that I'm playing 3.Nf3.  The Hippopotamus only works when White has committed to a4 or Bc4 (preferably the former).  In lines where White hasn't committed to either move, the Hippo is utter crap, and will always lose with correct play by White!

After 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d6, I play 3.f4!