Do certain openings make you feel slightly insulted and angry?

"Bad bishops defend good pawns" as they say, plus there are ways for this bishop to get into the game like going to e8 and redeploying along the e8-h5 diagonal, if you're not able to simply trade it off for White's "good bishop" which would then leave you with a good dark square bishop vs a bad one.

For me playing as White against the French I often have problems with my light square bishop because you always have to guard it from being traded off for Black's bad bishop. And also, I'm never quite sure where to put it, I remember when I first started playing the Advance variation, I put the bishop on d3 and I ended up playing the Milnar Barry gambit except I had no idea I was playing a gambit and just thought I'd lost a pawn. So I'm always fretting now, "do I put the bishop on e2 or do I put it on d3, oh no a knight is coming to f5 does this mean I should trade off this great bishop for the knight"? The light square bishop for White can actually be a real headache.

The more I improve at chess the better the French seems. I've actually tried playing it a few times as Black and I found those games easier than playing the Sicilian.

Also when I started I didn't use the Advance variation this is something I've begun using recently because I think it's an important pawn structure to learn, you can get it in many Sicilian games, like you can often transpose an Alapin into a French Advance, or from a Rossolimo anti-Sicilian, or the Tal Gambit declined with 3.e5.

Could you give me any insight into why lower rated players prefer the [French Advance Variation], though?

Justs99171: When White pushes 3.e5 against the French it feels good. You are locking in Black's light bishop, taking f6 away from the Black king knight, and you can practically taste a Bd3-Bxh7 sac after Black castles.

Plus most White players know the French pawn chain story too. So both players sort of know what they are doing in the French Advance and that's a good feeling too.

3.Nc3 and Nd2 are much iffier options for lower-rated players. They've likely glanced at the big crazy-long sections on the Winawer, the Tarrasch looks counter-intuitive, and what if Black plays some kind of Classical?

The Advance is not a bad choice. It comes and goes at higher levels, but grandmasters still play it.

I really am to hard on the french. Others are right, it is a good opening and there is a reason it is the third most popular choice. It's sound and very hard to break down.

I think the more we grow as players the more tolerant we become of different ways of playing. I always thought the kings gambit was garbage as well but the better I get the more I realize that white does have more compensation then a rank novice may expect. An extra doubled pawn on the kingside is not always going to be enough to win even if you withstand the attack.

When I play the french and I lose or when I play the kings gambit I lose does not mean that others that play it are idiot's.  They may be able to make it work and the positions are sounder then they might first appear. Part of the brilliance of the game is that many different strategies are equally good ways to proceed and most roads do indeed lead to rome.

Indeed, such Super Grandmasters like Anand and Shirov play the advance, as well as the great Evgeny Sveshnikov, who has written two excellent books on it, and with quite adorable covers as well.

If you ask French players, they'll likely tell you they love playing against the Advance best out of all White's options. I believe this affinity is partly due to all the quick wins against inexperienced White players who blundered a pawn in the opening. The statistics on it seem equal, until you look further and see the statistics on Sveshnikov's a3 system, which favor White. I believe it's an opening variation that can improve ones chess since it is so strategic and this pawn structure shows up in various different openings and situations. Also by playing the Advance you're learning how to play the French as Black since the Advance leads to the most typical French positions. GM Simon Williams has said, if you've learned the Advance you're well on your way to learning the entire French.

LOL. I don't think the mice think what you think. Everytime the cat takes a pause, while the mouse plays dead...this latter is too busy looking for an escape route...I've seen one or two successfully escape from my cat..

Compare that to the last several U.S. executions of deathrow inmates by lethal injection whereby they executee is writhing in pain for hours screaming he feels like he is being burned alive from the inside out ---

I do not believe these are "botched up" executions.

This thread just confirms the fact that chess has too much ego going on for my liking - oh no he moved Nc7 ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Like wtf?

It leads to a similar pawn structure and playing the Advance as White against the French will help you as Black facing such positions.

Many years ago when I used to play 1.e4, I was always annoyed when someone played the Alekhine. It felt somehow like I was being goaded. Later, I learned a bit about the opening, and decided I loved the ideas in it. So I took it on as my main response to e4, and you know what happened?

I started really hating people who played 2. Nc3, in response!

But really it's best to let all of that go. A move is a move, and so long as it's legal, learn to find the best response and detach from that emotional response. You will play better chess in the end.

1 d4 arg what a little coward 1 e4 arg who does this idiot think he is starting an attack so early

1 c4 try to get me out of book arg

It all goes to show that chess is, among other things, a game of psychology.

King's gambit makes me feel "bad".

i'm laughing my back off at all this hate for the alekhine defence... it is named after one of the greatest for a reason, it's not a grob type of bs... mah!

It's a great opening! It might not be grandmaster flavor of the month, but there are tons of amazing high level games with it. 

oh perhaps I was being superficial, however white still has chances for a draw due to the bishops being of opposite color.

Now that is mind boggling ... why did he put his pawns on dark squares? A person usually needs more than two extra pawns to win an opposite color bishops endgame and I've seen studies of Bishop + 4 pawns vs Bishop of opposite color drawing.

Same here, the Alekhine doesn't deserve to be mentioned alongside the Owen's or Scandi.  

The opening is chess, but it's also a negotiation between both players about what kind of game they will play -- tactical or positional, who gets the home field advantage, and maybe even some trash talk.

I'd love to have been there in 1960 when Spassky played 1.e4 against Fischer in their first game ever. Fischer countered with 1...e5 instead of his usual Sicilian. Then Spassky trumped Fischer's surprise and played the King's Gambit!

Fischer got the better of the game, but Spassky went on to win. What a splendid psychological duel.

Was Fischer daring Spassky to play the King's Gambit? Was Spassky in effect replying, "OK, punk. Let's see what you got."

I'm getting insulted when people play against me as black 1.e4 e5 2. Nf3 f6. On the one hand it's easy ponts but on the other it's not good to have the same rating with such players.