Bored with 1.e4

I've certainly had fun (and more than a little success OTB) with 1d4 lines, particularly Queen's Gambit (don't know why you would want to avoid it) and Torre Attack. I also really enjoy 1c4.

Musik, what happpened to your decision to give the King's Gambit a good go and post your progress?

Try 1.g4, followed by f4.

If e5 is not played, berate the fail in the chat.

why would you play that in the first place

That sounds like a pretty hoopy idea.

Or was that GM Beetlebaum...?

Btw not long after that game was played Jim Kweskin (in association with Porky Pig) went on to even greater fame as the Amazing Kweskin:

I'd say branch out into the Evans Gambit - very close the the Italian game but veers off into quite a different flavour!

There happen to be a couple of Evans Gambit themed tourneys in the current upcoming list.

Steve

You guys are crackers!

Thank you for reminding me. I got depressed, losing faith in the opening after clobbering someone who played it against me. After 1.e4 e5 2.f4, I played ... Bc5 (!), which really put the hurt on White. I will try to find the game.

It's like my experience with the Fried Liver Attack. Once my opponents figure out the tricks and traps in this opening, and the King's Gambit, I found it really hard to get any advantage out of either opening with the White pieces.

It would be fun to learn another opening that promises a high percentage of mistakes for both sides of the board. Is this what players mean when they say that a certain opening leads to sharp play?

Playing a new, crazy, sharp, and tactical opening would at least keep me busy for a while, and maybe after some time away from 1.e4, I will return to the "best by test" refreshed and interested in taking it to the next level, like trying new variations in the Italian, i.e., the Evans Gambit.

The Ruy Lopez is almost never played at my level. Once in Live Chess, I had the Black pieces, and beat White with a little trick. So, I do study tricks and traps for fun. Here it is.

Regarding my King's Gambit game, I will post it tomorrow after I get Download All My Games in One PGN.  I can then do a search in Chessbase by openings.

I found one of the King's Gambit games where I clobbered a guy who had the White pieces. I am kinda down on the KG for the simple reason that after 1.e4 e5 2.f4, ...Bc5 is so incredibly powerful. If I were to take up this opening again, how could I ever get any kind of an edge after 2...Bc5?

It seems like it is almost a refutation of the KG. I have a game somewhere, still looking for it, where I played ...Bc5, and the game lasted longer, but I still won easily. 

With that said, I am very interested in getting suggestions for other wild, crazy, and sharp openings where it's really easy for either side to make mistakes. Thank you.

Musikamole, it is popular, but not the end of the world for White.  There are lines he can enter into that still give him a bit of an edge against it, but it is an interesting defense for Black.

As a beginner, I am not looking for an edge, as it will evaporate.

After 1.e4 e5 2.f4 Bc5, what lines would throw a curve ball Black's way?

@Musicmole be careful of that move. Like BirdBrain has said, it's a classic popular move. Wrong move and your queen will be trapped, or even you will losing it. Even on some move if the queen can survive, black can be check mated. I find a way for black to save the queen. And i have try many other move for black, but it seems that white always has the solution. I think 13... Qxf3 is the best solution for now. If someone has better solution, please post it here. I always curios about this move and not find the best solution yet.

@BirdBrain i read your 1.f4 thread few days ago and i like it :D I have try to play it, but i don't know what i to do in the middle game lol.
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/why-play-1-f4

The choice of opening is such a hyped thing. It seems to me as if almost all players think of nothing than that. Even the thinking "I am an e4-player" (or whatever) is strange to me; would anyone say "I am an Knight-ending type of player"?

When I look at my games, I usually lose because I make some mistake in the middlegame, or (more often) in the endgame. Sometimes I misplay an attack, and end up a pawn down. Almost never is it the openings fault. 

So, I will try to spend all my time on scrutinizing my decision making, my judgment of positions, my [lack of] ability to play endgames.

So, I play a simple scheme as white: the London. OK, so many of you will now respond: "That is truly a bad opening, it gives nothing for white", "black can equalize". Yes, sure. 

And in, say, 50% of my games with white, that happens. And, after the equalisation, black makes a stupid mistake, or misplays the position. Or, I make a bad judgement, and hands over the play to black. 

The point is: I need only a fraction of my time to study openings. When I played 1.e4, or 1.d4, I constantly searched for ways of handling the Sicilian, the French, the Caro-Kann, Gruenfeld, Kings-Indian, Nimzo, etc.

I tell you the truth: I more often get an advantage with London than with my earlier openings. Because most opponents get a bit arrogant, and don't have any prepared response 

You can make a mistake at any phase of the game and your opponent can follow up with another mistake. You can pick one game of many and say this was the loosing mistake, but in another game it is a different mistake. The more advanced the player the less evident are their mistakes but to off set this the sharper is their ability to take advantage of lesser mistakes.

Its nice to particularise about chess and point to this or that it makes for entertaining chat and speculation. Generalised statements are dangerous far better to talk about a particular position or combination and even then there will be disagreements.

I never play 3.fxe5 (??). Perhaps you got the players mixed up. Here it is again. I have the Black pieces and won by checkmate.

2...Bc5 is just another reason (out of many) to claim that 2.f4 is much worse to 2.Nf3.