Overrated Openings

awesomnd plz explain about the sodium. but kenmack i TOTALLY AGREE about the smith-morra

Fischeryouth seriously you are kicking a dead horse with this thread.

i am not really that good at english expressions so plz explain.

The usual version of the idiom is "beating a dead horse". Maybe kicking is the Australian version :-).

Supposedly when a horse refuses to take you where you want to go (or pull a cart) you "beat" (hit with a crop or stick) it to force it to start moving. But only a stubborn fool would beat on a dead horse because that can never accomplish anything.

In modern usage "beating a dead horse" means to continue to make useless and time-wasting arguments about something that has already been settled or overtaken by events. It especially applies when someone continues to argue their case after his opponent has conceded the point--not taking "yes" for an answer.

I vote for the English opening. Perfectly good move of course but somehow it has a reputation of being a virtual peer of 1. d4 and 1.e4 when in reality it is an open invitation to Black to do whatever he likes. Love your standard defense to 1. d4? In most cases it is fully playable versus 1. c4 and while White certainly does not have to play an early d4 it is usually his most critical option. Or would you prefer 1. ... e5 with a reversed Sicilian? Have fun! There is also the whole 1. ... c5 complex if Black prefers.

It's a second tier opening with a first tier reputation.

Interesting to compare it with Bird's opening which is a second tier opening with an irregular reputation and hence underrated. While strategically very different, both openings have similar meta-objectives. The Bird is sound and playable. White gets to choose his own favorite development plan with a minimum of concern for his opponent. In most cases White avoids early simplification or direct conflict in the opening and seeks winning chances in a complicated and unbalanced middlegame where he can outplay his opponent.

i can't say that any of the first pawn moves are overrated except maybe e4.  Make no mistake, this is my favorite opening move, but when people say about d4, which I also play, "d4 is solid but not as powerful as e4," or maybe, "e4 leads to much sharper and more interesting play than d4,"  i want to barf.  Has anyone heard of the anti-moran gambit?

the sodium is Na3. recently, it has gotten really popular by throwing off your opponent. as you see on game explorer, it has a 60% win percentage (i think). even it being so high, i feel it is harder to get the knight back into the action. and of course, a knight on the rim is dim!! although it might just be me cause im really bad...

thx dark for explanation i dont think i am beating teh horse i think its aliove an well. liked your rhyme awesmond a knight on the rim is dim :)

anyone else?? spiffe we still havent heard from you.

i know uberly over glorified

i am really really really bored and i decided to look at the forums ive posted in. apparently, in the beginning of this post, fischeryouth was accused of bumping. what is bumping?

Either the planets have aligned to make your slight internet naivette seem like the most funnily ignorant post I've ever seen, or...

Troll.

wow dude, thanks i was just asking. i dont spend my life on chess.com like some... cough cough. lol jk but seriously, its just a question

It means pulling up an old thread to the top so that more people will post in it. You are *bumping it up* by making a new post. This frowned upon in any online forum, even if the thread pertains to EXACTLY what you want to talk about. Its just the unwritten rule to revive 'dead' threads.

The fact that you have bumped up a TWO MONTH old thread is either sheer irony or on purpose, and I couldn't tell which.

I agree that the French Advance is highly overrated. I play the French, and I am always hoping that my opponent advances, rather than playing the Tarrasch, Winawer, or even exchange variations.

Of course, there are two kinds of white players who play the advance. Those who do so knowing what they are doing, and those who do so because it just looks like the right move.

And I think the Sicillians are vastly overrated, at the club level. Yes, in the hands of Fischer or Kasparov, the Sicillian is the most deadly thing going. In the hands of a 1200 rated club player, it is often a disaster waiting for a place to happen. Most beginners would be much better off playing 1.e5, or the French, or the Caro-Kann, or the Alekhine's, or pretty much anything else really. Plus which, the Sicillian is the hardest opening to learn in its own right, and then you have to learn how to handle all the anti-sicillians to boot. The other defenses are just as sound for a beginner, and much easier to learn.

The same goes for the KID. Sure, its a great defense to 1.d4, perhaps even the best. But it is subtle, and riddled with theory. A beginner would be better off playing something like the Dutch Stonewall, which has little to no theory, and is simple to learn.

After spending too much time trying to learn difficult openings like the English, the Sicillian, and the KID, I have backed off and now play the Vienna, the French, and the Dutch Stonewall. Now I can focus on tactics and endgames instead of trying to memorize the Sicillian Najdorf 30 moves deep.

The Scandanavian is simultaneously the most overrated and most underrated opening!

It seems like a huge chunk of people here are devoted to the Scandanavian, another huge chunk seem to think it's a big blunder that no reasonable human should ever play... and then there's sanity which (IMO) is: jeez seems okay but kinda 19th century throwback-y, I prefer a more postional set-up...

You are not an authority on chess. Stop saying absurd things like this.

The sicilian concedes to white an edge in development and a space advantage in most lines.

Wow I cant believe that many people think the advance french is overrated.  Actually I would struggle to believe that ANYONE would think this.  It's one of the most underrated lines going.  It's a perfectly fine choice for white and has been played by several top players and is played regularly by a few, and yet still there's this myth (usually among just-past-beginner players) that it's a beginner move.  It's the very definition of underrated.  Usually it gets much more respect from higher ranked french players than lower ones though where perhaps it is neither over nor underrated. 

Overrated:  Sicilian for black, smith morra gambit for white, KID, and pretty much any 'systems', the hippo. 

Underrated:  French advance!  Alapin Sicilian, 4 knights game, Scandinavian, perhaps the open ruy, bishop's opening. 

Rated just right:  Ruy Lopez, Italian game, caro kann, most dubious lines and gambits.

edit: oh yes, and I laughed at the sicilian not conceding development.  c5 is NOT a developing move.  After 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 white is way ahead in development and it's why the opening is so sharp.

Controlling a square is not development.  Opening a line for the queen is irrelevant since development is mostly about minor pieces.  Even if you don't count it now, eventually black is going to lose a move to develop his bishop. 

sicilian