Is anything better for me than the Parham?

Beautiful game The_Gavinator, you obviously could never have done this with an opening such as the ruy lopez. In this game you gained material very quickly while if you played another opening such as the ruy lopez the game would have been very long and drawn out, probably winding up a draw.

Actually, black played fairly well in that game.

That's what I was thinking whatupyodog. I agree black played badly, but going 20 moves deep in the ruy lopez would give me a more closed position, I won material in the first 10 moves with this.

you misquoted me dumbass

Opponents who blunder a piece in the opening vs the pharam will not know 20 moves of any opening.  They probably barely know 5 moves of any opening.

But yes, trappy openings will score faster and more frequently against beginner class opposition.  It just depends on what kind of chess you aspire to. 

@whatupyodog, how did you get such a good rating if you play such bad openings. 95% of chess.com thinks your 2 openings are horrible. They are just plain bad.

No actually, most people on this site are the beginners who know tons of openings and bluder pieces. The ruy lopez, even after move 3, is very closed. It would be harder for me to do what I did.

CHCL, maybe it's because those openings aren't bad. (DUHHHHH!!!!)

LOL CHCL, maybe its cuz those openings pwn, plus i barely even play on this site, i would probably be over 2k if i did.

Also CHCL, you forget to take into account that successful troll is successful.

I mean seriously...

Gavinator here is my analysis

That is the point. If you would play stronger openings you would easily break the 2000 barrier. It is holding you back.

 Also why don't Grandmasters play the Parham? Obviously because it is bad.

wow, great defense bro on moves 7 and 8, except one small problem on move 9, Bxf6 pwns the fuck out of black.

I am sorry if people are taking my suggestions the wrong way. I am not trying to troll though.

NO, i am taking them seriously, its this jetfighter dumbass im pissed at.

yeah, That is why I don't normally do analysis this late at knight

I've already explained this, the Parham is incredibly open, a slight error can cause fireworks to explode, gm's tend to avoid that. At our lower level, mistakes are common, and Parham players can explode. I have never played a master, so my slight tactical errors aren't being exploited, and I can use my open attacking game to win games. I don't see why that's bad?

Jetfighter, I dont' see what you did. You added like two comments. And have you considered I did so well because of the Parham? If I was in the ruy lopez, I wouldn't be able to exploit my opponent like that, which is why the Parham pwns,

no you don't get that your opponent screwed his game over fairly quickly, in the Ruy, or the Italian game, which you don't want to make either of those agressive because you seem to get with out giving, you will not make it very far in the real world that way, to get a reward you need to take risks; take the stock market, you are investing in Government bonds, which are very low risk, because against your opposition you gain a decent proportion of wins, I play the riskier investments with a higher payout if I am succesful in controling the game and not just waiting for my opponent to F up like the parham hopes to, its Government bonds vs. Stock in Gibson Guitars.

In the kings gambit, which I know you think is the best thing ever, you only win if your opponent f's up. Otherwise you lose. The thing with the Parham is, you didn't throw away that pawn and open up your kingside, so if your opponent plays solid defence, you end up even.  Judging by your analysis above, I don't think you need to tell me what's bad about the Parham, it just shows I'd crush you too. If my opponent did your alternate line above, I'd go up a piece and a rook, and have probably had him resign right there.

Jetfighter, you are dumb, the all reward no risk thing you cant think of is counting cards, which you could compare to the parham.