Enter the Omega Reti Gambit

Hadron 

Well, the same question applies just what engine is GM_Martin and what hardware is it being run? Simply because 15..f6??? is a horrendous move and 15...f5 blunts White's attack cold..

That same question was asked by Earl from my Yahoo Unorthodox Chess Opening
Newsgroup. This was my reply:

Not sure what plaftform the chess engine GM Martin is running on. 

 I checked the position with the move f5 and found that it was the best move in that position. It would be more difficult for me to attack Black with that pawn setup. 

However I had the chess engine Rybka 4 running and it gave Bg5 as better over
the move f5. Chess engines have 2 flaws and that is it has a strong material bias

which means that it will pick off anything that is free. And also that chess engines

cannot see beyond its event horizon. It cuts off its calculation at a certain move.

I am able to exploit those 2 flaws in the chess engines. However it is very rare

that I can defeat ICC Chess Engine GM Martin (2600). Have only a handful of wins

but that is not much. 

Some years ago a hand held chess device won a GM chess tournament. So the

chess engines I play that are listed can defeat human GMs in a chess game. I am

not afraid of taking on the chess engines because I can test my chess opening

lines. The chess engines on the ICC play the same opening lines for each individual' chess engine. I can improve the same line that I play against that chess engine. And if you can defeat a chess engine with that chess opening you should also be able to defeat human chess players.

Some years ago I ran a chess engine tournament with the Medusa Gambit

(1.d4 Nf6 2.g5) with 4 chess engines. The strongest chess engine was the 

Russian chess engine Strelka. Strelka is strong in the endgame because It

trades pieces and heads for the endgame where it wins most of the time.

Anyway that chess engine came in dead last because it retreated its pieces.

In gambit positions you almost never retreat youir pieces. And the chess

engine that played more human like won that chess engine tournament.

Best Regards
DarthMusashi 

He already said it: to be creative. You create a Quasimodo, and then you name him Rodolfo. Bang!, success.

This player makes ridiculous comments. i do not believe he is an actual IM.
He only says he is an IM but I do not think so. He has been on my case for
a long time in other chess opening topics. Reveal you name and I will check
the FIDE rating listings.

Best Regards
DarthMusashi 

4.d3 makes absolutely no sense...white is just down a pawn for nothing.

You obviouly do not see the danger of exchanging your key N in Black's
defense of the King side castled position. You spent 3 moves exchanging

your N for the lazy N at c3. This was pointed out to me by IM Gerard
Welling of the Netherlands and he was quotiong GM David Bronstein.
And the same thing happened when GM Morozevich played GM Anand in
a blitz game. It came out of a Kings Gambit and GM Anand got destroyed
in a king side attack by Morozevich. That lazy N on c3 in most cases is usually
not involved in the game at hand.

Your reasoning is based on the number of pieces which is what most players

believe. But to get to a higher level you have to get beyond that reasoning.
Tactics is what separates the various rating classes from Super GM down
to Class E.  For me playing some opening that is unsound or sound does
not matter because I can use the same tactics in other chess openings. You

have to stretch you boundaries to improve your game.

Best Regards

DarthMusashi.

Well all of the openings you mention above are pure and utter garbage.  As strong as you are, you'd be even stronger if you played something reasonable.  There's room for creativity in openings that aren't out-and-out refutable.

Well if you believe they are refutable then show me the refutation. You are

just making statements without any proof. I would like to see your refutation

to both my Gibbins Weidenhagen Gambit 1.d4 Nf6 2.g4 and my Ulysses Gambit
1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nf3. 

Best Regards

DarthMusashi

The first one is exceedingly easy: 2...Nxg4, Black wins.  I play engines-on correspondence chess over at FICGS (my performance rating in one tournament section is about 2450 right now, the section where somebody trotted out 1.e4 c5 2.Ne2 f5? against me -- a completely original TN, but, unfortunately, losing) and I would be quite happy to prove this, or, perhaps more correctly, me, Komodo 9.2 and Stockfish6 would.

The second one might take a more positional rather than brute force approach.  As somebody who wasted three decades playing the Budapest though, I don't trust anything that remotely looks like it, and as White you're probably throwing away any opening advantage at the very least.

Anybody can use a chess engine. But can you bust it over the board if you
see it for the first time? Using a chess engine in a tournament is like
cheating, which means your real strength is  not real becaue thes engine

played the game for you.You could not use a chess engine in a regularr
tournament game with time controls. If you do that that would also

be cheating. One of my chess students on chess.com had said that some

players over 2000 are using chess engines to play their game against  him and that is alos cheating. Do you have any morals?  Have you actually put any work into

improving your game by studying opening theory and middlegame theory?

Best Regards
DartMusashi 

Implying that a terrible move like g4 is impossible to beat OTB on your first try.

Yes it would be tough to beat on the first try. In fact 2 other players tried
to defeat it and lost 2 times each. Dan Oshima (1900+) created an opening

book for a new line against my Gibbins Weidenhangen Gambit 1.d4 Nf6 2.g4.

The moves were 1.d4 Nf6 2.g4 e5. He got chrushed over the board 2 times.
The same thing happened to Cornelius Rubasamen (2100+) the first time
however he did not study it like Oshima did but still lost that first game.

He also lost that second game with the same opening.  Cornelius went
on to become Hawaii State Champion 4 times and a National Master. However
when he goes to the mainland USA he gains rating points, but loses it in
Hawaii because almost all of the players in Hawaii are under rated
because we play in a closed system with hardly anyone from outside
of Hawaii playing in the local chess tournaaments. Local Master
Reynolds Takata (2250) does not play in the local tournaments because he

would have to get a perfect score to gain any rating points. 

Anyway having to play against it over the board will consume most of your
time because you would have to calculate each and every move. This
happened to Arianne Caoli (2000+) when she faced my Diemer Duhm Gambit
1.d4 e6 2.c4 d5 3.e4 (this could also arise from the French Defense
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.c4. After seeing the move 3.c4 she thought 45 minutes
to find a reply to my Diemer Duhm Gambit. I used the extra 30 minutes

In the game at a critical point in the game where it would determine
where if you played the right move you could win and if you played
the wrong move you would lose. Anyway the Diemer Duhm Gambit has

its own regular web page. Patrick Perry also did not play correctly

against my Ulysses Gambit 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nf3 because after 3...dxe4
4.Ng5 he played the wrong move 4...Nf6. When I played 5.Bc4 he played
e6 blocking in his B at c8. It became a bad Bishop. My N at g5 landed
at e4 and he could not place his other B at d6 which gave him 2 bad
Bishops. I used that advantage to convert that into an endgame win.
I just ground him down. Perry was actually very booked up on the
Caro Kann Defense because he had Russian analysis from the Chess Digest
Magazine. I would have lost that game because he had better preparation
with the Caro Kann Defense. He also had photographic memory. One day
he defeated 5 of the top players in the state blindfolded. I also lost that

game. 

Chess opening theory has been moving ever outward from the center

since the days of the Italian Masters. First you saw openings with either
the KP or QP opening. Then later you saw openings with c pawns

and f pawns being played. And more recently pawn moves with moves
like b4 and g4 were being played. The final frontier is the h and a
pawns which is now being played by Kadas (2300+) from Hungary. GMs

are now playing g pawn openings. This includes the Super GMs in this
world. Some masters are also playing an early h4 or a4 in the opening

because this is unexplorred territory. Such as in the Birds Opening of
the Ruy Lopez 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nd4 the move h5 has been
played by Henry Bird and some strong masters today. Also in the Ruy
Lopez the early move a5 has also been tried by other masters. IMs

like Basman play the Creepy Crawly Opening with moves for Black like h6

and a6 as the first moves. 

Best Regards
DarthMusashi