most obscure but awesome and useful opening
Sort:
@ultra-laser - Great thanks a lot I play that opening but on 2. i play g6 instead of the nardorff. Thnkx
Laser, that position is completely lost for black. I'm not saying I could convert the advantage but it is.
Damiano Defense, the Magikarp of chess openings!
It's inherent strength derives mainly from the surprise effect on your opponent , not so much from it's usability...
@bigdecline thnkx
StevieBlues wrote:
Laser, that position is completely lost for black. I'm not saying I could convert the advantage but it is.
I think it's supposed to be theoretically equal...
TheBigDecline wrote:
Damiano Defense, the Magikarp of chess openings!
It's inherent strength derives mainly from the surprise effect on your opponent , not so much from it's usability...
ya
woodrow wrote:
This is directed to UltraLaser: The fallacy in this reasoning is that White would play 15. Qd3 instead of Qd2. But whether White plays either move, according to Chess.com Game Explorer, on move 17 White can play Bb5. There are 28 master games that have arrived at this point, and White won 61%, Black won 14%, and 25% were draws. Also, White would probably not play 10. Kb1, but exd5 instead. If followed out to move 17, White still has a big win-percentage advantage over Black. I have not played this out on a chess engine, but I'd say Black is going to have to find some tactical masterpiece to overcome White's positional advantage. White should win this game. Black has a fighting chance, but only if White makes a tactical error. You can't tell anything about the tactical ability of either player based upon the moves you presented, since both sides are following long-established main lines or well-known variations.
Firstly there is no difference between Qd3 and Qd2. Secondly, white can indeed play Bb5 or Bd3. The ideas in each are fairly similar. White can play 10.exd5 and usually does, I was just presenting one variation which I personally like. Some players do play Kb1. And what's with "you can't tell anything about the tactical ability of either player"? Did I ever say you could? Attacking chances does not translate to what you said.
http://chesstempo.com/gamedb/game/1594882
Does this game make it clear enough to show what i meant?
To repeat: I posted that opening because the position that arises from it is one that I find interesting, because of the imbalance. I did not say it was theoretically great for black or anything like that. Interesting, that's all.
StevieBlues wrote:
Laser, that position is completely lost for black. I'm not saying I could convert the advantage but it is.
With respect, you're wrong. Black may be worse (although I think the advantage is not that big) but is certainly not in a lost position.
UltraLaser wrote:
StevieBlues wrote:
Laser, that position is completely lost for black. I'm not saying I could convert the advantage but it is.
With respect, you're wrong. Black may be worse (although I think the advantage is not that big) but is certainly not in a lost position.
Well you take it up with Houdini then. .90-1.00 advantage for white.
That's only because computers can't understand dynamic compensation.
dzindzi indian rocks!
@franken_berry - true enough but openings can be unknown and silly and still be awesome - it doesn't mean that they aren't cool if they arent good
Franken_Berry wrote:
By definition, there is no such thing as an awesome and obscure opening. The term is a contradiction. Don't mean to rain on your parade, let me know if you discover the philosopher's stone of chess openings that requires little skill and allows you to crush strong players.
awesome =/= good opening/playable at master level. "Awesome" just refers to personally thinking it is cool. For example. I think the Polish is pretty awesome, yet I never play it OTB because it isn't playable against someone who knows what they're doing.
I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned the Alekhine Defense with 1. e4 Nf6!? yet. It is a very useful weapon - especially in blitz - against opponents who might get overly ambitious in the first few moves.(four- and three pawns attack for example) There are only two, rather modest looking variations which save a small, but solid plus for white, most other tries equalize easily and can even get quite dangerous for white.
One example for this would be this line in the four pawns variation, which worked for me at least a dozen times in blitz:
I just run the end position of Alekhnine and it doesn't look that bad to white: at depth of 19 moves it's only -1.04 points for white. Maybe if you don't know what you are doing or in a blitz setting it could be useful. Definately doesn't seem busted.
Pippychess wrote:
what is the most obscure but awesome and useful opening thanks a lot for replying everyone :) I am not ultra familiar with all the chess openings so could you post their first three moves or so
"None of the above." You don't even have to play chess to logically deduce that a genuinely "awesome and useful opening" would not be obscure for very long. Concentrate on playing Double KP Openings as much as possible with both Black and White (as recommended for beginners by the great hypermodern GM Richard Reti) and don't waste time looking for the Fountain of Youth or Holy Grail of chess openings. Instead spend your time on learning basic principles of openings, middlegames and endgames, and figuring out which openings work for you and which ones don't. The Italian Game is a good one to start out with.
http://www.chess.com/blog/NimzoRoy/chess-opening-principles?_domain=old_blog_host&_parent=old_frontend_blog_view
http://www.chess.com/blog/NimzoRoy/beginner-chess-book-recommendations
http://www.chess.com/blog/NimzoRoy/endgame-faqs?_domain=old_blog_host&_parent=old_frontend_blog_view
[COMMENT DELETED]
Pessimus, I did overread a bit. The end-result of Alekhnine seemed at first to have an unplayble advantage for black, and the comment "white is busted" lead me to run the position on computer. As I found out, it is a very useful defense leading to advantage for white, it just isn't the miracle game-ender I first thought it was.