is Alekhines defense a serious opening?

It is a very serious opening.

I Alekhines defence took me to a rapid chess.com rating of above 2000 and still, people of this rating rarely know any theory in the alekhines defence what so ever. I am getting advantages more often than not against white (my blitz raitng is much lower since I only play on mobil on the bus etc).

However, if you are talking about top GM defences, it has worked as a surprise weapon before, but nothing more than that.

What?

The Alekhine Defense has been played 20 times in World Championships. It's not considered a cream of the crop defense but it's doable, especially on the club level if it suits your style and you learn it better than everyone else.

IMO

If Komodo vs Komodo or Stockfish vs Stockifish (no need to put a lot of time because in blitz in theory they are more efficient than any humans playing even in long time) can't prove that with White they win almost all the time or have too high a percentage of wins without defeat in the long term, it means that the Alekhine's defense is valid and must be taken seriously.

The rest is just subjective opinions because it doesn't matter to say that a position would be bad or winning when even a champion could not win this position proclomed bad or winning against Komodo or Stockfish in the long term.

That's a spambot making ads. Report it and don't listen to it (except for its talk about chess, which is accurate).

its a secondary defense lacking both the depth of sidelines or objectivity of the top 4, but a fully respectable defense. Perhaps the greatest theoretical vindication for the openings idea is that modern approach to dealing with the alekhine is to give back the advanced e pawn via exd6 and playing for the modest advantage d4 and c4 provide.

I'm kinda curious where you're getting a success rate similar to the Bongcloud?

The Alekhine is just fine (not a poet, but I'm tryin'). It's (almost certainly) not the objectively best response to 1. e4, but it's well within the playable range, and it's imbalanced and dynamic, which counts for a lot in practical chess.

It's also one of those openings where if you have studied and know concretely what you're doing and play an opponent who is just relying on principle, you will often get equal or slightly better position fairly frequently with minimal effort. I prefer it to the Pirc or Modern in terms of easily getting good positions against unprepared opponents.

Its utility declines rapidly at higher Elo levels though.

Alekhine's defence is one I've only faced a couple times, mostly when playing computers. I had a buddy play it OTB in a friendly match we used to have where we often just tried things on a whim. It's one that I got curious about when I was young, and had a look at some lines then, so when he sprung it on me I had some vague memories to aid me. I never tried it myself as the hypermodern ideas behind it didn't suit me. The simple version is that Black is happy to give up tempo by getting their Knight chased about because White does this by over extending their pawns too early. Black then sets about trying to tear down the unstable White centre.
Some openings and defences just take a lot more experience to really play well as the positions that arise are often quite unique to that opening, and Alekhine's seems to be in that group. However, as far as I'm aware, it is not refuted and for someone willing to put in the time to learn it, it is a completely valid and good defence, but not for those just starting out in chess. It requires a decent level of experience first as it is very easy to mishandle and just get over-run.

Why?

well bongcloud is better

I present my case:

I rest my case