Anderssen's Supermodern Attack

Well, this is the reversed variant of my wonderful St. George's Supermodern Fortress!

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/st-georges-supermodern-fortress

It's characterized by a3, d3, g3 and Bg2 in any order and against virtually anything! In particular, it can be started from Anderssen's opening 1.a3.

It looks much too passive for it to forumulate an attack, but on the other hand, the setup may be difficult to break through.

Yigor, As a preliminary test of your opening idea, I've selected three arbitrary chess engines (Rybka 4, Houdini 1.5a and Stockfish 2.1.1), and put them against each other in a tournament from the following hypothetical start position.

1.a3 Nf6 2.d3 d5 3.g3 e5 4.Bg2 

All engines will play each other twice. Once as white and once as black. These will be long games (40 moves in 2 hours for each side). I have now left the computer running overnight, and I will post the games and results when available (probably when I get home from work tomorrow). If your opening fares well, perhaps I'll try a few other start positions - This is exciting.

Thanx MalReid, great idea!

White is basically playing a "Tiger's Modern" (1 e4 g6  2 d4 Bg7  3 Nc3 d6  4 f4 a6) reversed.

the continuation looks like ! (f4 and e4) for white

Bah humbug! BUT MalReid has a great idea, although I think many more games would be required to draw any kind of definitive conclusion.

Having a thematic tnmt with this opening would be another way of "beta-testing" it.

Here are the results of the tournament I mentioned in post #3. This match took a bit longer than I'd predicted, but here is the final result:

I'm a bit confused. The software did not do as I requested. There is no game with Stockfish as white against Houdini as black, and no game with Houdini as white against Stockfish as black. But other pairings have been duplicated, but producing different games ???

nice opening I guess ... I'll try it someday in my games !

MalReid: interesting! Maybe we should indeed make a thematic tournament to test this idea as suggested by NimzoRoy.

You don't need a 3000+ engine to know white has given up equality by move 1, and that black is positionally ahead by move 3.

I don't believe that U as smart as U pretend to be.

Of course W is not making the slightest try to gain an advantage, but saying that at move 3 he is clearly worse is ridicolous. W is playing a fully respectable black defense a tempo up. That said, i don't think i'll ever play this way as W.

My refutation: The Anti-Anderssen's Supermodern Attack.

1.a3 d5 2.d3 h5! 3.g3 h4!! 4.gxh4 and the fortress walls start to crumble.

If 4.Bg2 then 4...h3 5.Bf3 (5.Bf1 c5 =/+) 5...Nf6 =/+

4...Rxh4 5.Nf3 Rh5 6.Bg2 Bh3 7.Bxh3 (7.Rg1 Bxg2 8.Rxg2 Nf6=) 7...Rxh3= 

And black is okay in all lines, and as Fischer said when he made his 'bust' to the King's Gambit: 'If white plays differently, then black just wins differently.'

Yes, in the case 1. a3 d5 2.d3 h5 white shouldn't continue with g3 but play rather something like 3.Bf4 having advantage. There are always exceptions.

This h4 plan doesn't look particularly strong to me. B has probably tons of easier ways to equalize, 2...h4?! in itself is rather pointless and weakening if W avoids 3.g3. And even if he "falls" in the trap he is not worse in a rather interesting position. His pawn structure is somewhat weaker but he also has a slight lead in developemt. Maybe my evaluation is mistaken but in my view creating this sort of imbalanced position is exactly what W wants.

Yes bresando, I do like to play unorthodox openings, but I was not being 100% serious with my refutation. Though I probably would play something silly like that in a quick friendly game down the club.

This opening as just won a game during this year's French Team Championship!

Thanx Lokaz, that's cool.

 I looks like black was totally passive here.