Grob's Opening

For  my sins I am playing in a Chess.com online tournament using the Grob Opening. Did Grob have any success with it?? It has only one column in my version (tenth edition 1965) of MCO and I have collections of the games of many of the old masters and none of them seem to have played it. In fact I have never played over a master game that uses it. The masters are probably a good judge!

I wrote a book on the Grob a few years ago (1988) and found dozens of masters who played it at one time or another.  The oldest game I can find is by Alexander Fritz, played in Germany in 1866.  It was first analyzed by Carl Ahlhausen (1835-1892).  International Master and Swiss champion Henri Grob (1904-1974) played it in hundreds of correspondence games from the 1950s to the early 1970s.  He was a Swiss master and won most of his games.  Paul Keres played it once and won in correspondence in 1935.  Tartakower played it in simuls.  International master Kurt Richter (1900-1969) was playing it it the 1930s.  GM George Koltanowski played it once in 1949 and won.  Claude Bloodgood played it in correspondence games in 1950s to 1970s.  International Master Michael Basman picked it up in the 1970s and 1980s and was successful with it.  Grandmaster Skembris of Greece started to play it successfully in the 1980s.  Grandmaster Barua of India tried it out a few times and won.  FIDE Master Tim Wall and patzer Bill Wall plays it.  International Master Gerard Welling of the Netherlands  started playing it in the 1990s.  I have over 1,000 Grob games in my database played around the world. 

Thanks billwall et al. The Grob has obviously been played far more than I ever imagined. One thing about this great game is that you never stop learning.

By the way Bill with a rating of 2473 on Chess.com you are hardly a patzer. You are too modest!

what about the Borg.

You will be assimilated.

I created my own variation to improve on Basman's variation.

1.g4 e5 2.e3! instead of 2.h3.  I will gladly play a Grob game against anyone.

Just keep Grobbing.

I think 1. g4 is underrated.

It is certainly an aggressive try for advantage.

I disagree. I think g4 creates more weaknesses than either of those moves, so I think g4 could only be better for psychological reasons.

The point behind the rook pawn openings is to allow a rook lift to assist in the attack while the rook pawn is used as a battering ram in a pawn storm attack.

The problem is that this opening is the worst opening in chess, even worse than 1.g4.  In rank 1.a4 is slightly better than 1.h4 because it does not weaken the kingside.  1.h4 creates a weak pawn on h4 that can only be defended by the rook and a pawn move to g3, further weakening the kingside.  It does not open diagonals for the bishops, and the knight's future is questionable.  The point of a rook lift is very slow, losing several tempo, allowing black to build up a powerful position.  Now for the theory.

1.h4

This opening is referred to as Kadas Opening

1...d5

This move takes a stake in the center and prevents a possible rook life unless white wishes to expend an additional tempo on a pawn move.

But, there is a better move.

1...c5!

This puts to question White's first move.  White would not play 2.d4 because it causes an additional loss of tempo.

2.e4

This is the only sensible move as others allow black to take the center.

2...b6

This move sets up a fianchetto to attack White's weak pawn on e4.  The defense of this pawn becomes very difficult for white.

3.Nc3 Bb7

This also prepares a d5 pawn break cementing Black's grip on the center.

4.Bc4

To prevent the bishop from being blunted by a defensive d3 after a d5 pawn break.

4...e6!

Black now has several threats: The d5 pawn break, and Be7 threatening White's weak h4 pawn.

5.d3

Probably White's best to get the other bishop out and castle queenside if possible.

5...Be7

Forcing a concession by white to deal with the threat.

6.Nf3

Again, probably the best move.  After 6.h5, black can just play 6...h6!  White wasted an additional tempo so black can use his time to prevent the advance.  Furthermore, White's dark squares are very weak.  If white instead plays 6.Qg4, then black gains at least two more tempos after 6...Nf6.  If white continues 7.Qxg7? black should play 7...Rg8! 8.Qh6 d5! and white is losing.

6...d5! 7.exd5 exd5 8.Bb5+ Nbd7 9.Ne5 Nf6 10.Bg5 0-0!

White is completely lost.

I always feel a bit "dirty" when I am involved in any of these weird openings.

I've never played 1) g5, but have often played 1)b5 - I nearly always play 1) e4 but I love to play g5 whenever I can during the opening or middle-game - I always reckons that if I can play g5 I has a won game - an' that borne out by results

 if playing g5 always gives a won game, everyone would play it. There is NO MOVE that gives a WON, EQUAL, OR LOST GAME!! Any moves merit depends on the other aspects of the position. Such a generalized comment is not only rediculous but dangerous. You have a rating over 1800 and should know better than to say something so stupid! A lower rated player may take your faulty advice and retard their chess development. Think about what you are saying before you make such unfounded declarations!! And as to your "results" that back up your moronic statement, challenge me to a few games and I will give you ample chances to play your "miracle move" g5 and we will discuss your results afterwords. THINK BEFORE YOU TYPE!!!

Of course there are moves that always win. For example, Rh6#, g5#, axb4e.p.# or if * is a wildcard *#.

Im no master, obviously, but just started playing with the grob, and at the level I am at it is pretty solid. Aggressive, throws everyones theory right out the window, usually weakens their kingside just as much, has some pretty brutal traps in it