If "pauix 2" uses the King's Gambit on me, I trust the Falkbeer to get him.
If he's black and uses the Dragon, I'd go with the Levenfish.
Defeat Your Own Favorite Opening!
Sort:
blurft, very ambitious!
Meh. There's not a lot of ambition involved in following theory 20 moves deep.
It's just that I've always thought those games looked so interesting and complex that I couldn't wait till my chance came along to play one OTB.
But alas, I have never in my life so much as seen 3...Nxe4 when I played the Vienna as white. Kind of a downer.
I think when I was playing 1...e5 as black, I saw 2.Nc3 maybe five times in my life, 3.Bc4 maybe twice, and 4.Qh5 not at all.
I found, strangely enough, that I got to play the black side of a lot more Viennas if I played Alekhine's as black. But in the off chance somebody would actually push 2.e5, I'd be miserable, so the tradeoff wasn't worth it.
bresando-bresando would probably start with 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 and now that coward bresando would probably play the solid 4...dxe5 5.Nxe5 c6 6.Be2 Bf5. Then probably 7.g4!? which sometimes caused me trouble as black.
Whenever I used to play against myself, I went for 1. f4 d5 2. Nf3 Bg4 lines.
White seemed to be rocking in that game - you aren't partial to the White pieces, are you? ;-)
RoffleMyWafflez has to be the single greatest screen name ever 
When I play myself, it seems that I always lose. Now before you say "duh", let me clarify. Even when I'm playing myself, I like to "cheer" for a certain side, as crazy as that sounds. Often, I will be playing against an opening line of a common opponent or something like that, and I will be rooting for "my side" to win. Anyway, what I find very strange is that my side always seems to lose. I think I overextend myself most of the time. I agree with many of the other people here. Playing myself is mentally taxing.
As for the "Anti-Caro-Kann", I have seen many different names for that opening. I personally use the "Accelerated Panov Attack". I believe a popular Caro-Kann book calls it "Panov's little brother". 365chess.com calls it the "anti-anti-caro-kann", which I found quite amusing.
In my opinion, it's pretty good practice with the Isolated Queen's Pawn, but I suppose that this might be one of the reasons that some people don't like it.
Well said, long live the isolated queen pawn! It gives rise to interesting and instructive positions.
If I was playing myself, I would go for a boring exchange variation, ultimately leading to a draw. The problem is, I think my entire game is fairly balanced. I won't be able to beat myself...I have a large opening repertoire, decent middlegame calculations, and good endgame technique. I would try to stir the game into insane tactical complications if I wanted to go for a win. :x
Jun 28, 2011
0
#35
ruby7 wrote:
I would try to stir the game into insane tactical complications if I wanted to go for a win. :x
I'd do the opposite. I'd attempt to get a "Boring" position. I'd hate positional games as much as my "other me". We'd both attempt a stupid pawn break or we'd offer ourselves a draw in 20 moves.
Would know that my opponent would play sicilian against e4 so would play 1.e4 for a change (I like 1.e4 but don't like 1.e4 e5 in high level games)
So probably a sicilian english attack with the following line.
lol k.
But remember black had a 32 rating, so he wouldn't have caught it.
Perhaps you could try instead h3, meeting Bh5 with Nxe5 winning a pawn and meeting Bxf3 with Qxf3 threatening mate on f7.
White Mezmer and Black Mezmer would play the Blackmar Diemer Gambit. Not our favourite opening, but with only a statistical chance of around 10% to draw, we'd place heavy bets and pre-arrange the match to do exactly that.