At least he's having fun? I mean, he's not playing chess, but having fun is what really matters...unless you want to argue your point according to the rules of the game you're attempting to play...
I see nothing wrong with the attack. Others at a higher or lower level may disagree; it all depends on preference. I used that attack in a tournament only once, when I was p!ssed off after losing a game. I won.
Yep, I play the Sicilian to avoid *all* of this horrible nonsense.....because the Sicilian - famous for inviting insane attacking lines - is less crazy than this stuff. I feel like fried liver is very immature chess: Move pieces onto aggressive squares and see if black falls apart. Basically, black cracks or white gets swept under........I find this very uninspiring for both sides. Like - why would you even play chess if you try to force the game to a decisive conclusion before move 10!? Clearly you don't want to play for very long :P
I am playing these lines for years now and I will recommend not to play fried liver instead of that play loli attack with e4 e5 nf3 nc6 bc4 nf6 ng5 d4 exd4 nxd4 now comes the blow d4 bamm hahaha !!! so now our plan is to play o-o and then play re1 and go for nxf7 type attacks
and believe me this attack is much better and more enjoyable than fried liver attack you can also see the video on YouTube
Anyone else notice that the lower the rating the more confident sounding someone is about their analysis?
I once posted a thread on how I thought the King's Gambit was trash. IM pfren might remember; he posted in it. It was basically what you said. I felt most ashamed following it. But I have improved since then 
I once posted a thread on how I thought the King's Gambit was trash. IM pfren might remember; he posted in it. It was basically what you said. I felt most ashamed following it. But I have improved since then
There is nothing wrong with being wrong. There is something horrbily wrong with persisting in being wrong despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
A fact which is often ignored by the majority of people in this world.
If black defends correctly he will still be lost. The fried liver is a forced win for white.
Then why doesn't everybody play 3.Bc4?
Because 3.Bc4 doesn't force the Fried Liver Attack.
This is what I think of when I hear fried liver.
Not really. I love the fried liver attack, it used to be my favorite opening when I was a 500-700 because my opponent always fell for it. Not any more though...
Then why doesn't everybody play 3.Bc4?
Because 3.Bc4 doesn't force the Fried Liver Attack.
But then why des everybody play 3..Nf6?
Then why doesn't everybody play 3.Bc4?
Because 3.Bc4 doesn't force the Fried Liver Attack.
But then why des everybody play 3..Nf6?
To further the point, why do some people still play Nxd5?
Then why doesn't everybody play 3.Bc4?
Because 3.Bc4 doesn't force the Fried Liver Attack.
But then why des everybody play 3..Nf6?
To further the point, why do some people still play Nxd5?
Shirov-Sulskis Tromso 2014 comes to mind.
This is always fun to play:
I agree, this is always fun to play. However, before playing you MUST learn how the pieces are moving.
I don't get it. Camberfoil does not know how the pieces move?
No, I just messed around with the pieces to get a 1282 rating.
This is always fun to play:
I agree, this is always fun to play. However, before playing you MUST learn how the pieces are moving.
I don't get it. Camberfoil does not know how the pieces move?
prfen is pointing out that after Camberfoil's 4th move
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Bc4 Bc5
4. Ng5
That any 800 rated player would have simply played Qxg5 and white's best move is to resign.
Then why doesn't everybody play 3.Bc4?
Because 3.Bc4 doesn't force the Fried Liver Attack.
But then why des everybody play 3..Nf6?
To further the point, why do some people still play Nxd5?
Most people who play Nxd5 don't know any better.
Then why doesn't everybody play 3.Bc4?
Because 3.Bc4 doesn't force the Fried Liver Attack.
But then why des everybody play 3..Nf6?
To further the point, why do some people still play Nxd5?
Most people who play Nxd5 don't know any better.
GM Sulskis played it
Here are Two Main lines of the "Fried Liver Attack". It was first played by Polerio in 1590! Computer Analysis shows both lines as virtually even, no advantage even though White has Sacrificed a Piece! That is due to the Fact that White has plenty of compensation for that Knight.
If Black can carefully Defend... He is supposed to have the Advantage...lol Rubbish! The Databases will show you that White prevails most of the Time! It is easier to Attack than Defend. That is why people go to extremes to avoid defending this attack. I prefer to play the Ulvestad Variation with 5... b5!
There is a Fischer Variation where White plays d4 the move before the Knight Sacrifice, it is deadly!!
My take on this is, in the Main Lines, Black is best if he can trade down the Pieces! or Break the Pin and seek Shelter. White is Best to Complicate and Dogpile, Avoid the Exchanges!
'Fried Liver' Main Lines
Steinitz Variation
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Bc4 Nf6
4. Ng5 d5
5. exd5 Nxd5
6. Nxf7 Kxf7
7. Qf3+ Ke6
8. Nc3 Ncb4
9. Qe4 c6
10. a3 Na6
Zukertort Variation
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Bc4 Nf6
4. Ng5 d5
5. exd5 Nxd5
6. Nxf7 Kxf7
7. Qf3+ Ke6
8. Nc3 Nce7
9. O-O c6
10. Re1
Fischer
6. d4
Ulvestad Variation
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Bc4 Nf6
4. Ng5 d5
5. exd5 b5
6. Bxb5 Qxd5
7. Bxc6+ Qxc6
8. O-O Bb7
9. f3 h6
10. Nh3 O-O-O
You write that it is rubbish that if black defends correctly he has the advantage because white's winning percentage is so high. But that means that black did not defend correctly.