1.e4 e5 2.c3?! Nh6! 3.d4 Nf5 can be played, and you destroy your strong center if you take the knight on f5.
If you try stopping Black's fiendish plan with 3.g4, you may well fall into the ferocious Bujumbura trap: 3...Na6 4.Ne2 Nc5 5.h4 Nd3 mate.
Envented a new opening-how do I get credit 4 it?
Sort:
matta, are you critical of the critical reply?
Birdy, all openings already exist! [think about this]
Thank you, Steve212000!
Mattattack, either you totally missed the humour with your two posts or you were subtly adding to the comedic value.
Here_Is_Plenty wrote:
Mattattack, either you totally missed the humour with your two posts or you were subtly adding to the comedic value.
I recognized the humor; I just didn't laugh.
With all due respect to Qh4, White can simply reply with the infamous Qa4!
A Dance with Dragons.
Analisis of the opening on my machine set at 1/2-ply reveeled great 5th move for white.
After black-bishop runs away...
5.Ke2 ! Gives major advantage. 
The great thing about this move is with the King on a ''white '' square. Black's dsb cannot attack it ! King can claim the center !!
Jul 25, 2012
0
#29
How do you get credit for it? Using it to beat reigning world champion would be a step in the right direction. Hey, it worked for marshall.
mattattack99 wrote:
Why worry about 2...Qh4, when nobody has found a decent reply to 2...Nf6?
...Qh4 is not "The critical reply."
Yes, I think we have to plump for adding to the comedic value. Saw the humour? - I think not. Ponz is a very experienced player who was deriding the practice of claiming to "envent" openings, prevalent with bad players on this site. He is knowledgeable theoretically and from prior threads and posts (nevermind common sense) I think most people here knew he was not seriously suggesting 2)...Qh4 was a challenging move. That you could not recognise this at 1900? More worrying. I'll give you a clue, though: I am not using humour - you really disturb me.
It seems arrogant to tell a joke and assume that if people don't laugh at it, then they don't get it.
Here_Is_Plenty wrote:
mattattack99 wrote:
Why worry about 2...Qh4, when nobody has found a decent reply to 2...Nf6?
...Qh4 is not "The critical reply."
Yes, I think we have to plump for adding to the comedic value. Saw the humour? - I think not. Ponz is a very experienced player who was deriding the practice of claiming to "envent" openings, prevalent with bad players on this site. He is knowledgeable theoretically and from prior threads and posts (nevermind common sense) I think most people here knew he was not seriously suggesting 2)...Qh4 was a challenging move. That you could not recognise this at 1900? More worrying. I'll give you a clue, though: I am not using humour - you really disturb me.
That might be a little oversensitive.
BirdBrain wrote:
This opening already exists.
Don't you get the joke?
Nah, matty, just explaining now so you don't carry on crashing through life with blinkers on.
Here_Is_Plenty wrote:
mattattack99 wrote:
Why worry about 2...Qh4, when nobody has found a decent reply to 2...Nf6?
...Qh4 is not "The critical reply."
Yes, I think we have to plump for adding to the comedic value. Saw the humour? - I think not. Ponz is a very experienced player who was deriding the practice of claiming to "envent" openings, prevalent with bad players on this site. He is knowledgeable theoretically and from prior threads and posts (nevermind common sense) I think most people here knew he was not seriously suggesting 2)...Qh4 was a challenging move. That you could not recognise this at 1900? More worrying. I'll give you a clue, though: I am not using humour - you really disturb me.
I didn't know the number I see when I hover over people's user names is a humor rating.
joeydvivre wrote:
Was mattattack trying to make a joke there? It wasn't funny. It offended me. I am not laughing.
How hypocritical.
Wow. Just wow. Surgically removed.
Jul 25, 2012
0
#38
1.e4 e5 2. c3 Qh4 3. g3! Bc6 and black has fallen into a trap I anvented! 4. gxh4!!!!
While a 42 and 50 year-old took offense to the fact that not everyone finds the same things as humorous as you.
mattattack99 wrote:
While a 42 and 50 year-old took offense to the fact that not everyone finds the same things as humorous as you.
I think they're taking offense to your claim that you recognised the humour, when you clearly did not, else you wouldn't have posted a serious reply. I think you're kind of a douche for doing so, too.
1.e4 e5 2.Qh4 Bd3!? (following the ideas in RL - Bc2)