Do certain openings make you feel slightly insulted and angry?

Just for you, Omega_Doom

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chess.pl?pid=10021&side=black&node=1622421

Definitely look at this link.

Justs, it doesn't change much. Engine gives white +4 in the best for black variation. White eventually takes a piece back + several pawns. But usually people don't know the best continuation and give up a queen or get checkmated.

the problem of unorthodox openings is that it seams the other side thinks he can beat you just becaause he gets you out of book  and not taking you seriously though not necessarily meaning  disrespect but its outrageous when someone gets out of correct play for side openings thinking he can beat you which first kills the fun of a game and second doesnt help you test your prepartion and makes chess looks ugly :

examples : -the boudler attack in the sicilian deffence .

- the sniper .

and this is just something worth punishing but who has time to refute all ?!

No... Decision making is not unique to Humans. That's ridiculous. Actually everything you've said here is ridiculous. You understand that we are in fact animals too, right? There is absolutely nothing we can do to the planet or the environment that shouldn't be considered natural. If we destroy the planet--then the Earth died a NATURAL death. This obviously doesn't mean we shouldn't do everything we can to avoid destroying the environment, but it's arrogant to act like we're not just as natural as any other animal.

Omega_Doom and FadyElkady

Anybody can play any opening with engine analysis, at an amateur level. And Omega_Doom, you should know this since you're obviously analyzing Damiano defense with software. Even in a slow game, is white going to play accurately?

I don't agree with this way of playing and we should work to refute bad openings.

If you're not prepared, you can lose.

 'To be modern is to find ourselves in an environment that promises us adventure, power, joy, growth, transformation of ourselves and our world - and at the same time, that threatens to destroy everything we have, everything we know, everything we are… To be modern is to be part of a universe in which all that is solid melts into air.

Playing unorthodox lines or openings is just part of the dance of competitive chess.

It can give a player an edge. It's no guarantee of winning.

If the other player can't handle an opening surprise over the board, that's his problem and he doesn't deserve to win.

Tournament chess is about winning. It's not about beauty or having one's opening preparation properly tested.

At the class level most games aren't settled by opening preparation anyway.

The Sniper is very common in the internet and probably at the club level, too. For the grandmaster, it's not main line. For us, it is something we are going to see often. We might as well consider it main line. We're going to see the other openings more often than we see the good openings.

playing against ugly openings wont  help me study more sound ones for future when playing for a title 

The other day I played the Ponziani against a guy I could tell didn't study openings much. He just played natural developing moves and most of the time he got by.

But that's a recipe for a bad Black game in the Ponziani. So I played the Ponz against him.

He fell into a classic Black mistake that looked like it won material but was bad, though not obvious. I'd forgotten the response and spent several minutes working out the correct play to win a piece, then I had to hang on while he came on with a proper kingside attack. My defense was good enough, but it wasn't the best, and if I had made a real mistake I might have lost.

The Ponziani is not a good opening for White if Black knows what he is doing. Nonetheless in 2013 Carlsen played it against a 2700 player and won. They both knew the theory but Carlsen just wanted to get his opponent out of regular lines and relied on his ability to outplay just about anyone in a level position.

If you can't beat an ugly opening, you won't be playing for a title.

I hate some openings but people can play what they want even if it pisses me off sometimes

It goes both ways I guess. There are a lot of low rated players who think 3 e5 gives white an almost winning advantage (hell I did too at one time) just by looking at the pawn chain, and so a lot of times, lower rated black players who have learned the ideas of the french will watch their opponent's pawn chain crumble. This may cause the low rated black players to then overestimate the french interestingly enough.

As for 3 e5's overall strength... I mean, yeah, there are grandmasters who like it, but I think in general it gives black a pretty decent deal. I feel like the fact that the center is more exposed gives black more serious counterplay -- true, white has many of his own ideas, but I don't know, I feel like it often leads to an equal, but interesting and imbalanced position. That means it could be fun to play for both sides, but an equal game is a better deal for black than white.

Not that I can say I can know if black can get equality in every single line... but it does seem harder to find lines that give white an advantage in the advance as compared to in the classical for example. But, still, it's hard to say, it's probably still best to try to find the way of handling the french that works best for you.

I see what you mean. I understand what you mean. But that doesn't change what I think about the human species.

It actually looks drawish (though as you say a computer would be needed to confirm). The reason is that White can guard c5 with the king and b1 with the bishop, and Black can't use his bishop to force a promotion. However, it's definitely tough to hold if it is a draw since Black has more freedom to open a hole on the kingside.

Maybe I'm an idiot, but how would 42...Bb4 fare in comparison? Either way, Black to win or draw is a good result, objectively, and I think at this rating level White is likely to crack under pressure regardless.

+ 22.745

u hate me for my openings? ;)

Hello,

      Since the Center-Counter Defense (Scandanavian? bah!) is the only strong response to 1.e4, your gut response to 1.e4 d5 shows you are at least on the verge of being a fool.  Sorry, but truth will out.

Bob

A configuration or sequence of moves by little wooden pieces can kill you. Interesting.

Still don't get the Alekhine haters, and even the Scandinavian is playable. It seems that the inability to play and/or refute the so called bad openings is the cause of anger, not the bad openings. So you're angry at yourself?! Even more interesting.