played it alot in bullet. great system.
c3 - Saragossa opening. Is it good?
Sort:
abrahampenrose wrote:
What's the point of moving the c-pawn to move it again later?
Let's say you really like trying the Sicilian with reversed colors. So why not? Or if you want to get in reversed Benoni positions. There are quite a few reasons why someone might try this idea - to play the Black repertoire with the White pieces.
abrahampenrose wrote:
@Birdbrain Right, but I've always considered reversed openings better if you can use the extra tempo to play a useful move. Wasting the entire tempo is indeed, a waste.
It is and it isn't. I personally agree with you that if I were to play 1. c3, I would either play into an e4 system, or perhaps a modern. It would be interesting to combine it with 2. g3 and then you could go into many pawn structures, even the Leningrad with an early f4.
What are your thoughts on 2. g3?
Why wouldn't you play 5. d3 instead?
BirdBrain wrote:
Why wouldn't you play 5. d3 instead?
I would surely prefer Black's position after 5. d3...
In fact, 1. g3 can transpose into normal 1. d4 and 1. Nf3 openings!
Here is a screenshot from my Chessbase of moves chosen after 1...e5:
https://gyazo.com/7b60a87d082b63e51f6f6e0f9ba323e5
Here is after 1. c3 e5 2. g3 d5:
https://gyazo.com/ff600992477d86b5dfc880763125a1f8
Interesting enough, a popular "common-sense" strategy is the early h4 and Nh3-f4:
Fiveofswords wrote:
c3 is not very testing and you kinda offer black a free hand in how he wants to develop. Of course this can be useful for practical reasons. As time wasting moves go, c3 is actually one of the better ones, because at least it does give some scope to your queen, does care about d4 center square, and doesnt limit white any mroe than depriving c3 of his knight. So if you want black to be forced to think for himself in the openign rather than copy theory, its not a bad choice. better than something like a3 oh h3 which ignore the center, and imo better than something liek e3 or d3 which kinda remove the option of e4/d4 in one move.
What do you think about Kasparov's 1. d3 blitz concept?
Jun 18, 2016
0
#30
My friends and I used to call 1.c3 the "Charles" Opening, having no clue about the term "Saragossa" back in those days. I used to try it every now and then, usually with a 2.Qc2 follow-up and looking sometimes for the reverse Slav.
its okay-ish, but I would rather play it as black (caro kann)
1.c3 b6 makes sense. Since White is declaring he will fortify d4, perhaps Black can wage a war for the e4 square? Also, with Qb3 available immediately to White it is uncertain if Black's QB should develop to f5/g4 so why not the long diagonal?
NewArdweaden wrote:
Not terribly.
Haha, se kar na ustajje komentarji, čeprou's že kadaj zaprou akaunt. 
MSC157 wrote:
NewArdweaden wrote:
Not terribly.
Haha, se kar na ustajje komentarji, čeprou's že kadaj zaprou akaunt.
Hehehhe
Jun 19, 2016
0
#35
As black, 1... c6 is a solid reply to any white move. If you're playing 1. c3 as white, you're essentially playing a Caro-Kann or Slav opening with an extra tempo, and those are both very solid openings. However, you're still essentially playing black. It's rather unambitious to choose to play black when you have the option of playing white. 
If someone plays 1. c3 e5 2. d4 e4, I would recommend playing 3. d5. This stops black from playing Nc6 and makes the e4 pawn vulnerable and hard to protect. If black lets you play it, 4. Qd4 is very strong. If not, then you can play moves like c4, Nc3, Qc2 etc.
Perhaps it would be a good practical choice against any less than masterly opponent that is too reliant on their memory of opening theory. You get to make it all up from move one. What does pfren think?
Not terribly.